Soil carbon dioxide fluxes following tillage in semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystems

Published source details Álvaro-Fuentes J., Cantero-Martínez C., López M.V. & Arrúe J.L. (2007) Soil carbon dioxide fluxes following tillage in semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystems. Soil and Tillage Research, 96, 331-341.
Share Tweet Email

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

	Action	Category
	Water: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage Action Link
	Soil: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage Action Link
	Water: Use no tillage in arable fields Action Link
	Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields Action Link
	Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields Action Link
	Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields Action Link

Water: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2005 on rainfed farms in the Ebro river valley, Spain, found more water in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Water availability: More water was found in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in 10 of 18 comparisons, in the two days after tillage (0.08–0.26 vs 0.05–0.23 g water/g soil). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage was used on seven plots each (33–50 x 7–10 m plots), on a total of two farms, with multiple crops. A cultivator (15 cm depth) or chisel plough (25–30 cm depth) was used on plots with reduced tillage. Herbicide was used on plots with no tillage. Water was measured in soil samples (5 cm depth), at three times (0, 24, and 48 hours after tillage).
Soil: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2005 on rainfed farms in the Ebro river valley, Spain, found less greenhouse gas in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage. Greenhouse gases: Less carbon dioxide was found in soils with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage, in six of 20 comparisons, in the two days after tillage (0.1–0.6 vs 0.1–6.4 g CO₂/m²/hour). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage was used on seven plots each (33–50 x 7–10 m plots), on a total of two farms, with multiple crops. A cultivator (15 cm depth) or chisel plough (25–30 cm depth) was used for reduced tillage. Herbicide was used for no tillage. Carbon dioxide was measured with a dynamic chamber (21 cm diameter, 900 mL airflow/minute, two samples/plot), 4–6 times in the 48 hours after tillage.
Water: Use no tillage in arable fields

A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2005 on rainfed farms in the Ebro river valley, Spain, found that tillage had inconsistent effects on water in soils. Water availability: More water was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in 11 of 24 comparisons, in the two days after tillage (0.04–0.26 vs 0.02–0.20 g water/g soil), but less water was found in 3 of 24 comparisons (0.08–0.11 vs 0.09–0.14). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on ten plots each (33–50 x 7–10 m plots), on a total of three farms, with multiple crops. A mouldboard or subsoil plough was used on plots with conventional tillage (25–40 cm depth). Herbicide was used on plots with no tillage. Water was measured in soil samples (5 cm depth), at three times (0, 24, and 48 hours after tillage).
Water: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2005 on rainfed farms in the Ebro river valley, Spain, found that tillage had inconsistent effects on water in soils. Water availability: More water was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in 4 of 18 comparisons, in the two days after tillage (0.10–0.23 vs 0.09–0.20 g water/g soil), but less water was found in 6 of 18 comparisons (0.05–0.11 vs 0.08–0.14). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used on seven plots each (33–50 x 7–10 m plots), on a total of two farms, with multiple crops. A mouldboard or subsoil plough was used on plots with conventional tillage (25–40 cm depth). A cultivator (15 cm depth) or chisel plough (25–30 cm depth) was used on plots with reduced tillage. Water was measured in soil samples (5 cm depth), at three times (0, 24, and 48 hours after tillage).
Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2005 on rainfed farms in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (10)), found less greenhouse gas in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Greenhouse gases: Less carbon dioxide was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in 18 of 39 comparisons, in the two days after tillage (0.1–2.3 vs 0.1–13.3 g CO₂/m²/hour). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on ten plots each (33–50 x 7–10 m plots), on a total of three farms, with multiple crops. A mouldboard or subsoil plough was used on plots with conventional tillage (25–40 cm depth). Herbicide was used on plots with no tillage. Carbon dioxide was measured with a dynamic chamber (21 cm diameter, 900 mL airflow/minute, two samples/plot), 4–6 times in the 48 hours after tillage.
Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2003–2005 on rainfed farms in the Ebro river valley, Spain, found less greenhouse gas in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Greenhouse gases: Less carbon dioxide was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in 12 of 30 comparisons, in the two days after tillage (0.1–6.4 vs 0.1–13.3 g CO₂/m²/hour). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used on seven plots each (33–50 x 7–10 m plots), on a total of two farms, with multiple crops. A mouldboard or subsoil plough was used for conventional tillage (25–40 cm depth). A cultivator (15 cm depth) or chisel plough (25–30 cm depth) was used for reduced tillage. Carbon dioxide was measured with a dynamic chamber (21 cm diameter, 900 mL airflow/minute, two samples/plot), 4–6 times in the 48 hours after tillage.