Tillage, Row Spacing, and Cultivation Affect Erosion from Soybean Cropland
Soybean plots were planted in a replicated 2 X 2 factorial arrangement of row width [0.18-m (7-in.) or 0.91-m (36-in.) rows] and tillage [without prior tillage (no-till) or following primary and secondary tillage]. Additional unreplicated conventional and no-till plots were planted in 0.91-m rows an...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transactions of the ASAE 1993, Vol.36 (1), p.87-94 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 94 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 87 |
container_title | Transactions of the ASAE |
container_volume | 36 |
creator | Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS) Murphree, C.E Meyer, L.D |
description | Soybean plots were planted in a replicated 2 X 2 factorial arrangement of row width [0.18-m (7-in.) or 0.91-m (36-in.) rows] and tillage [without prior tillage (no-till) or following primary and secondary tillage]. Additional unreplicated conventional and no-till plots were planted in 0.91-m rows and were cultivated after planting. A rainfall simulator was used to apply a two-rainstorm sequence to a 9-m section of each plot when the soybean plants had from 6 to 11 main stem nodes (four to eight weeks after planting). Inflow was added during the second rainstorm to simulate longer slope lengths. Sediment size distribution and rill development were measured. The study was conducted in 1989 (the first year of no-till, after one year conventional tillage, after sod) and repeated in 1991 (second year no-till after treatments were rerandomized on plots in 1990). Results were similar for both years. In general, erosion rates were several times higher with conventional tillage than with no-till planting at the crop stage tested. Planting in 0.18-m rows doubled erosion rates compared to wide row planting during this crop growth stage. However, most striking was the large increase in erosion caused by row cultivation. Cultivation without intervening rainfall prior to the simulated rainstorm sequence increased soil loss 20-fold for the conventional tillage system and 40-fold for the no-till planted system. Erosion rates from a 70-mm rainstorm in one hour on a simulated 60-m, 6% slope planted in 0.91-m rows oriented up-and-down hill and cultivated averaged 57 Mg/ha for conventional tillage and 36 Mg/ha for no-till planting. Although the silt loam soil contained essentially no sand, between 20 and 30% of this sediment eroded as sand-sized aggregates |
doi_str_mv | 10.13031/2013.28318 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>fao_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_13031_2013_28318</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>US9405358</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a231t-1d2cd5e68fbbd101ad9d3413853d5a87b1516bed288071c1bfe9b07ef93d54073</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kM1PwzAMxSMEEmNw4gaXHLixjrhp1vQ4VeNLk5DYdq6cJpk6dU2VdqD992Qf4mRZ_vn5-RFyD2wMnHF4iRnwcSw5yAsyiEFAxJjILsmAMQZRzAVck5uu24QuESkbkM9lVde4NiP67X7posWyatYjio2m-a7uqx_sK9fQqbWm7OnMu-7QWu-2dOH2ymBDc-_aOizckiuLdWfuznVIVq-zZf4ezb_ePvLpPMKYQx-BjkstzERapTQwQJ1pngCXgmuBMlXB9UQZHUvJUihBWZMplhqbhXnCUj4kzyfdMrjpvLFF66st-n0BrDjGUBxiKI4xBPrpRLfYlVhbj01Zdf8rEyYzEUPAHk6YRVfg2gdktcgSJrg4aDyehtihMsXG7XwTPjxf-AO1z2w8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Tillage, Row Spacing, and Cultivation Affect Erosion from Soybean Cropland</title><source>ASABE Technical Library</source><creator>Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS) ; Murphree, C.E ; Meyer, L.D</creator><creatorcontrib>Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS) ; Murphree, C.E ; Meyer, L.D</creatorcontrib><description>Soybean plots were planted in a replicated 2 X 2 factorial arrangement of row width [0.18-m (7-in.) or 0.91-m (36-in.) rows] and tillage [without prior tillage (no-till) or following primary and secondary tillage]. Additional unreplicated conventional and no-till plots were planted in 0.91-m rows and were cultivated after planting. A rainfall simulator was used to apply a two-rainstorm sequence to a 9-m section of each plot when the soybean plants had from 6 to 11 main stem nodes (four to eight weeks after planting). Inflow was added during the second rainstorm to simulate longer slope lengths. Sediment size distribution and rill development were measured. The study was conducted in 1989 (the first year of no-till, after one year conventional tillage, after sod) and repeated in 1991 (second year no-till after treatments were rerandomized on plots in 1990). Results were similar for both years. In general, erosion rates were several times higher with conventional tillage than with no-till planting at the crop stage tested. Planting in 0.18-m rows doubled erosion rates compared to wide row planting during this crop growth stage. However, most striking was the large increase in erosion caused by row cultivation. Cultivation without intervening rainfall prior to the simulated rainstorm sequence increased soil loss 20-fold for the conventional tillage system and 40-fold for the no-till planted system. Erosion rates from a 70-mm rainstorm in one hour on a simulated 60-m, 6% slope planted in 0.91-m rows oriented up-and-down hill and cultivated averaged 57 Mg/ha for conventional tillage and 36 Mg/ha for no-till planting. Although the silt loam soil contained essentially no sand, between 20 and 30% of this sediment eroded as sand-sized aggregates</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-2351</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2151-0059</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2151-0059</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.13031/2013.28318</identifier><identifier>CODEN: TAAEAJ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers</publisher><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions ; Biological and medical sciences ; CONTROL DE LA EROSION ; EROSION ; ESPACEMENT ; ESPACIAMIENTO ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; GLYCINE MAX ; LABRANZA ; LLUVIA ; LUTTE ANTIEROSION ; MISSISSIPPI ; PLUIE ; SIMULACION ; SIMULATION ; Soil erosion, conservation, land management and development ; Soil science ; TRAVAIL DU SOL</subject><ispartof>Transactions of the ASAE, 1993, Vol.36 (1), p.87-94</ispartof><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a231t-1d2cd5e68fbbd101ad9d3413853d5a87b1516bed288071c1bfe9b07ef93d54073</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,4010,23271,27900,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=6089521$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murphree, C.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer, L.D</creatorcontrib><title>Tillage, Row Spacing, and Cultivation Affect Erosion from Soybean Cropland</title><title>Transactions of the ASAE</title><description>Soybean plots were planted in a replicated 2 X 2 factorial arrangement of row width [0.18-m (7-in.) or 0.91-m (36-in.) rows] and tillage [without prior tillage (no-till) or following primary and secondary tillage]. Additional unreplicated conventional and no-till plots were planted in 0.91-m rows and were cultivated after planting. A rainfall simulator was used to apply a two-rainstorm sequence to a 9-m section of each plot when the soybean plants had from 6 to 11 main stem nodes (four to eight weeks after planting). Inflow was added during the second rainstorm to simulate longer slope lengths. Sediment size distribution and rill development were measured. The study was conducted in 1989 (the first year of no-till, after one year conventional tillage, after sod) and repeated in 1991 (second year no-till after treatments were rerandomized on plots in 1990). Results were similar for both years. In general, erosion rates were several times higher with conventional tillage than with no-till planting at the crop stage tested. Planting in 0.18-m rows doubled erosion rates compared to wide row planting during this crop growth stage. However, most striking was the large increase in erosion caused by row cultivation. Cultivation without intervening rainfall prior to the simulated rainstorm sequence increased soil loss 20-fold for the conventional tillage system and 40-fold for the no-till planted system. Erosion rates from a 70-mm rainstorm in one hour on a simulated 60-m, 6% slope planted in 0.91-m rows oriented up-and-down hill and cultivated averaged 57 Mg/ha for conventional tillage and 36 Mg/ha for no-till planting. Although the silt loam soil contained essentially no sand, between 20 and 30% of this sediment eroded as sand-sized aggregates</description><subject>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>CONTROL DE LA EROSION</subject><subject>EROSION</subject><subject>ESPACEMENT</subject><subject>ESPACIAMIENTO</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>GLYCINE MAX</subject><subject>LABRANZA</subject><subject>LLUVIA</subject><subject>LUTTE ANTIEROSION</subject><subject>MISSISSIPPI</subject><subject>PLUIE</subject><subject>SIMULACION</subject><subject>SIMULATION</subject><subject>Soil erosion, conservation, land management and development</subject><subject>Soil science</subject><subject>TRAVAIL DU SOL</subject><issn>0001-2351</issn><issn>2151-0059</issn><issn>2151-0059</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1993</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kM1PwzAMxSMEEmNw4gaXHLixjrhp1vQ4VeNLk5DYdq6cJpk6dU2VdqD992Qf4mRZ_vn5-RFyD2wMnHF4iRnwcSw5yAsyiEFAxJjILsmAMQZRzAVck5uu24QuESkbkM9lVde4NiP67X7posWyatYjio2m-a7uqx_sK9fQqbWm7OnMu-7QWu-2dOH2ymBDc-_aOizckiuLdWfuznVIVq-zZf4ezb_ePvLpPMKYQx-BjkstzERapTQwQJ1pngCXgmuBMlXB9UQZHUvJUihBWZMplhqbhXnCUj4kzyfdMrjpvLFF66st-n0BrDjGUBxiKI4xBPrpRLfYlVhbj01Zdf8rEyYzEUPAHk6YRVfg2gdktcgSJrg4aDyehtihMsXG7XwTPjxf-AO1z2w8</recordid><startdate>1993</startdate><enddate>1993</enddate><creator>Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS)</creator><creator>Murphree, C.E</creator><creator>Meyer, L.D</creator><general>American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers</general><general>American Society of Agricultural Engineers</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1993</creationdate><title>Tillage, Row Spacing, and Cultivation Affect Erosion from Soybean Cropland</title><author>Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS) ; Murphree, C.E ; Meyer, L.D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a231t-1d2cd5e68fbbd101ad9d3413853d5a87b1516bed288071c1bfe9b07ef93d54073</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1993</creationdate><topic>Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>CONTROL DE LA EROSION</topic><topic>EROSION</topic><topic>ESPACEMENT</topic><topic>ESPACIAMIENTO</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>GLYCINE MAX</topic><topic>LABRANZA</topic><topic>LLUVIA</topic><topic>LUTTE ANTIEROSION</topic><topic>MISSISSIPPI</topic><topic>PLUIE</topic><topic>SIMULACION</topic><topic>SIMULATION</topic><topic>Soil erosion, conservation, land management and development</topic><topic>Soil science</topic><topic>TRAVAIL DU SOL</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Murphree, C.E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meyer, L.D</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Transactions of the ASAE</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Dabney, S.M. (USDA, ARS, National Sedimentation Laboratory, Oxford, MS)</au><au>Murphree, C.E</au><au>Meyer, L.D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Tillage, Row Spacing, and Cultivation Affect Erosion from Soybean Cropland</atitle><jtitle>Transactions of the ASAE</jtitle><date>1993</date><risdate>1993</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>87</spage><epage>94</epage><pages>87-94</pages><issn>0001-2351</issn><issn>2151-0059</issn><eissn>2151-0059</eissn><coden>TAAEAJ</coden><abstract>Soybean plots were planted in a replicated 2 X 2 factorial arrangement of row width [0.18-m (7-in.) or 0.91-m (36-in.) rows] and tillage [without prior tillage (no-till) or following primary and secondary tillage]. Additional unreplicated conventional and no-till plots were planted in 0.91-m rows and were cultivated after planting. A rainfall simulator was used to apply a two-rainstorm sequence to a 9-m section of each plot when the soybean plants had from 6 to 11 main stem nodes (four to eight weeks after planting). Inflow was added during the second rainstorm to simulate longer slope lengths. Sediment size distribution and rill development were measured. The study was conducted in 1989 (the first year of no-till, after one year conventional tillage, after sod) and repeated in 1991 (second year no-till after treatments were rerandomized on plots in 1990). Results were similar for both years. In general, erosion rates were several times higher with conventional tillage than with no-till planting at the crop stage tested. Planting in 0.18-m rows doubled erosion rates compared to wide row planting during this crop growth stage. However, most striking was the large increase in erosion caused by row cultivation. Cultivation without intervening rainfall prior to the simulated rainstorm sequence increased soil loss 20-fold for the conventional tillage system and 40-fold for the no-till planted system. Erosion rates from a 70-mm rainstorm in one hour on a simulated 60-m, 6% slope planted in 0.91-m rows oriented up-and-down hill and cultivated averaged 57 Mg/ha for conventional tillage and 36 Mg/ha for no-till planting. Although the silt loam soil contained essentially no sand, between 20 and 30% of this sediment eroded as sand-sized aggregates</abstract><cop>St. Joseph, MI</cop><pub>American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers</pub><doi>10.13031/2013.28318</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0001-2351 |
ispartof | Transactions of the ASAE, 1993, Vol.36 (1), p.87-94 |
issn | 0001-2351 2151-0059 2151-0059 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_crossref_primary_10_13031_2013_28318 |
source | ASABE Technical Library |
subjects | Agronomy. Soil science and plant productions Biological and medical sciences CONTROL DE LA EROSION EROSION ESPACEMENT ESPACIAMIENTO Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology GLYCINE MAX LABRANZA LLUVIA LUTTE ANTIEROSION MISSISSIPPI PLUIE SIMULACION SIMULATION Soil erosion, conservation, land management and development Soil science TRAVAIL DU SOL |
title | Tillage, Row Spacing, and Cultivation Affect Erosion from Soybean Cropland |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T01%3A26%3A13IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-fao_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Tillage,%20Row%20Spacing,%20and%20Cultivation%20Affect%20Erosion%20from%20Soybean%20Cropland&rft.jtitle=Transactions%20of%20the%20ASAE&rft.au=Dabney,%20S.M.%20(USDA,%20ARS,%20National%20Sedimentation%20Laboratory,%20Oxford,%20MS)&rft.date=1993&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=87&rft.epage=94&rft.pages=87-94&rft.issn=0001-2351&rft.eissn=2151-0059&rft.coden=TAAEAJ&rft_id=info:doi/10.13031/2013.28318&rft_dat=%3Cfao_cross%3EUS9405358%3C/fao_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |