Study

Soil food webs and carbon dynamics in response to conservation tillage in California

  • Published source details Minoshima H., Jackson L.E., Cavagnaro T.R., Sanchez-Moreno S., Ferris H., Temple S.R., Goyal S. & Mitchell J.P. (2007) Soil food webs and carbon dynamics in response to conservation tillage in California. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 71, 952-963.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2004 in an irrigated field in Davis, California, USA, found lower crop yields in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Crop yield: Lower chickpea yields were found in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of two comparisons (with continuous cropping: 25 vs 193 g dry weight/m2). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on six plots each (67 x 4.7 m plots, three beds/plot). All plots had Cicer arietinum chickpeas (garbanzo beans) in rotation with other crops. Crop residues were incorporated to 20 cm depth, and the beds were shaped, on plots with conventional tillage (disk, lister, and ring roller). Crop residues were flail mown and spread on the plots with no tillage. All plots were fertilized in 2003, but not thereafter (112 kg P/ha phosphorous, 50 kg NPK/ha, and 67 kg N/ha). Cultivation was used to control weeds on plots with conventional tillage. Hand weeding was used on plots with no tillage. Herbicide was used on all plots. Some plots were irrigated. Chickpeas were harvested on 28 June 2004.

     

  2. Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2004 in irrigated farmland in Davis, California, USA, found more organic matter and phosphorus in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Tillage had inconsistent effects on potassium. Organic matter: More carbon was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of two comparisons (in rotations with fallows: 4 vs 3.8 kg total C/m2). Nutrients: Similar amounts of nitrogen were found in plots with no tillage or conventional tillage (450–460 g total N/m2). More potassium was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in two of six comparisons (10.3–12.9 vs 6–7.7 mg K/litre), but less was found in one of twelve comparisons (4.8 vs 6.3 mg/L). More phosphorous was found in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of six comparisons (27 vs 19 mg P/kg soil). Similar pH levels were found in soils with no tillage or conventional tillage (pH 6.8–7.3). Soil organisms: Similar amounts of microbial and nematode biomass (both measured as carbon) were found in plots with no tillage or conventional tillage (60–80 vs 60 g microbial C/m2; 0.1–0.2 vs 0.2–0.25 g nematode C/m2). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on six plots each (67 x 4.7 m plots, three beds/plot). Crop residues were incorporated to 20 cm depth, and the beds were shaped, on plots with conventional tillage (disk, lister, and ring roller). Crop residues were flail mown and spread on the plots with no tillage. All plots were fertilized in 2003, but not thereafter (112 kg P/ha phosphorous, 50 kg NPK/ha, and 67 kg N/ha). Cultivation was used to control weeds on plots with conventional tillage. Hand weeding was used on plots with no tillage. Herbicide was used on all plots. Some plots were irrigated. Soil samples were collected in December 2003, and June, September, and December 2004 (0–30 cm depth, three samples/plot).

     

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust