Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-rnpqb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T06:58:20.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of conservation tillage on crop yields, soil erosion, and soil properties under furrow irrigation in western Colorado

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

M. Ashraf ,
C.H. Pearson ,
D.G. Westfall  and
R. Sharp
M. Ashraf
Affiliation:
Regional Agronomist, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, 14-L Model Town Extension, Lahore, Pakistan and former graduate student at Colorado State University;
C.H. Pearson*
Affiliation:
Research Agronomist and Professor of Soil and Crop Sciences, Colorado State University, Agricultural Experiment Station, Fruita Research Center, 1910 L Road, Fruita, CO 81521;
D.G. Westfall
Affiliation:
Soil Scientist and Professor, Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523;
R. Sharp
Affiliation:
Cooperative Extension Agriculture and Business Management Specialist.
*
Corresponding author is C.H. Pearson (cpearson@coop.ext.colostate.edu)
Get access

Abstract

Conservation tillage (CS) is used widely in rainfed and sprinkler-irrigated production systems but adoption of CS on furrow-irrigated cropland has been limited. Some crops and crop rotations are more conducive to conservation tillage under furrow irrigation than others. The objective of this research was to evaluate CS in a furrowirrigated crop rotation of corn, soybean, winter barley, and dry bean at Fruita, Colorado in 1991 and 1992. Infiltration rates were 24 and 50% higher and advance times were 37 and 25% longer in the CS treatment during 1991 and 1992, respectively, compared with conventional tillage (CV). Furrows in the CV treatment were 8 and 25% wider than those in the CS treatment after the first and sixth irrigations, respectively. This indicates more soil movement with CV than with CS. In 1992, soil water content in the CS treatment was 17, 17, and 27% higher than with CV throughout the growing season for corn, soybean, and dry bean, respectively. Grain yields of winter barley, soybean, dry bean, and corn were not affected significantly by tillage treatment. Profitability of CS and CV was quite similar when all four crops in the rotation were considered together. This research was conducted under conditions expected to be similar to those that could be used by growers and indicates that corn, soybean, winter barley, and dry bean can be grown successfully in rotation using conservation tillage under furrowirrigated conditions. Successful adoption of conservation tillage under furrow irrigation will require growers to adopt encompassing new production management practices and possibly purchase new equipment such as planters and cultivators that will operate in high residue conditions, and growers must overcome any psychological barriers they may have to maintaining high amounts of surface crop residue when furrow irrigating.

Keywords

ridge tillcrop residue
Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , June 1999 , pp. 85 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Aarstad, J.S., and Miller, D.E.. 1978. Corn residue management to reduce erosion in irrigated furrows. J. Soil and Water Conservation 33:289–291.Google Scholar
2.Abdi, A. A. 1989. Effect of tillage on soil physical properties and crop production. Ph.D. diss. Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins.Google Scholar
3.Allen, R.R., and Musick, J.T.. 1985. Irrigation furrow management for controlling water intake. Paper No. 85–2633. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers. St. Joseph, MI.Google Scholar
4.ASAE. 1988. Soil cone penetrometer. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers Standard S313.2. Agriculture Engineering Yearbook. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.Google Scholar
5.Bos, M.G., Replogle, J.A., and Clemmens, A.J.. 1984. Flow Measuring Flumes for Open Channel Systems. John Wiley and Sons, New York.Google Scholar
6.Brown, M.J., and Kemper, W.D.. 1987. Using straw in steep furrows to reduce soil erosion and increase dry bean yields. J. Soil and Water Conservation 42:187–191.Google Scholar
7.Carter, M.R. (ed). 1994. Conservation Tillage in Temperate Agroecosystems. Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, FL.Google Scholar
8.Carter, M.R., and Rennie, D.A.. 1984. Dynamics of soil microbial biomass N under zero and shallow tillage for spring wheat, using 15N urea. Plant and Soil 76:157–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Carter, D.L., Berg, R.D., and Sanders, B.J.. 1991. Producing no-till cereal or corn following alfalfa. J. Production Agric. 4:174–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Conservation Technology Information Center. 1997. CTIC Partners. Vol. 15 No. 6. West Lafayette, IN. Web site: http://www.ctic.purdue. edu.Google Scholar
11.Dickey, E.C., Shelton, D.P., Jasa, P.J., and Peterson, T.R.. 1984a. Tillage, residue and erosion on moderately sloping soils. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers 27:1093–1099.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Dickey, E.C., Eisenhauer, D.E., and Jasa, P.J.. 1984b. Tillage influences on erosion during furrow irrigation. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers 27:1468–1474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Doran, J.W. 1980. Soil microbial and biochemical changes associated with reduced tillage. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 44:765–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Eisenhauer, D.E., Dickey, E.C., Fischbach, P.E., and Frank, K.D.. 1982. Influence of reduced tillage on furrow irrigation infiltration. Paper No. 82–2587. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers. St. Joseph, MI.Google Scholar
15.Miller, D.E., and Aarstad, J.S.. 1971. Furrow infiltration rates as affected by incorporation of straw or furrow cultivation. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 35:492–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Mzembe, C.P., Danielson, R.E., and Bausch, W.C.. 1984. The effect of tillage on some soil properties. Paper No. 84–2079. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers. St. Joseph, MLGoogle Scholar
17.Sojka, R.E., and Lentz, R.D.. 1997. Reducing furrow irrigation erosion with polyacrylamide (PAM). J. Production Agric. 10:47–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18.Thien, S.J., and Kok, H.. 1989. Resn-till. Computer software for aiding tillage management decisions leading to soil and water conservation. Kansas State University Cooperative Extension Service L-781. Manhattan.Google Scholar
19.Van Doren, D.M., Triplett, G.B. Jr., and Henry, J. E.. 1976. Influence of long term tillage, crop rotation, and soil type combinations on corn yield. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 40:100–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
20.Yonts, C.D., Smith, J.A., and Bailie, J.E.. 1991. Furrow irrigation performance in reduced-tillage system. Trans. Amer. Soc. Agric. Engineers 34:91–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar