Study

Implementation of chiselling and mouldboard ploughing in soil after 8 years of no-till management in SW, Spain: Effect on soil quality

  • Published source details Melero S., Panettieri M., Madejón E., Macpherson H.G., Moreno F. & Murillo J.M. (2011) Implementation of chiselling and mouldboard ploughing in soil after 8 years of no-till management in SW, Spain: Effect on soil quality. Soil and Tillage Research, 112, 107-113.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Soil: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Soil: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2008–2010 in a rainfed wheat-legume field in southwest Spain (same study as (13)) found similar numbers of soil organisms in soils with no tillage or reduced tillage. Soil organisms: Similar amounts of microbial biomass (measured as carbon or nitrogen) were found in soils with no tillage or reduced tillage (199–1,612 vs 120–2,363 mg C/kg soil; 9–40 vs 9–69 mg N/kg soil). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage was used on three plots each (30 x 10 m plots). A chisel plough was used for reduced tillage (10–15 cm depth). A seed drill was used for no tillage. All plots were fertilized. Soil samples were collected in January 2009, June 2009, and January 2010 (three samples/plot, nine soil cores/sample, 0–25 cm depth). No tillage was used on all plots in 1999–2008.

     

  2. Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2008–2010 in a rainfed wheat-legume field in southwest Spain (same study as (28)) found more microbial biomass in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in two of 18 comparisons. Soil organisms: More microbial biomass (measured as carbon and nitrogen) was found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in two of 18 comparisons (0–5 cm depth, in January 2010: 445 vs 263 mg C/kg soil; 31 vs 17 mg N/kg soil). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on three plots each (30 x 10 m plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (25 cm depth). Herbicides and a seed drill were used for no tillage. All plots were fertilized. Soil samples were collected in January 2009, June 2009, and January 2010 (three samples/plot, nine soil cores/sample, 0–25 cm depth). No tillage was used on all plots in 1999–2008.

     

  3. Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 2008–2010 in a wheat-legume field in southwest Spain (same study as (31)) found more soil organisms in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Soil organisms: More microbial biomass (measured as carbon or nitrogen) was found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in four of 18 comparisons (0–5 cm depth, in June 2009 or January 2010: 458–2,363 vs 263–957 mg C/kg soil; 37–69 vs 17–25 mg N/kg soil). Methods: Conventional tillage or reduced tillage was used on three plots each (30 x 10 m plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (25 cm depth). Herbicides and a chisel plough were used for reduced tillage (10–15 cm depth). All plots were fertilized. Soil samples were collected in January 2009, June 2009, and January 2010 (three samples/plot, nine soil cores/sample, 0–25 cm depth). No tillage was used on all plots in 1999–2008.

     

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