Search

Soil CO 2 emissions respond differently to different tillage practices. However, limited information is available regarding the impact of conventional tillage (CT) and no-tillage (NT) on soil CO 2 emissions and the primary controlling factors or processes. The goal of this study is to derive the relationship of soil CO 2 emissions with soil physicochemical properties from differently tilled soils in a typical winter wheat summer maize rotation system. We hypothesized that soil tillage practices would impact the soil carbon cycle by modifying soil physical and chemical properties, which would in turn affect the soil CO 2 emissions. The study was conducted from 2018 to 2022 with two tillage practices using a randomized complete block design with three replicates. A leading international real-time monitoring system in situ was used to collect soil CO 2 emission data. Cumulative soil CO 2 emissions were reduced by 28.7% in maize and increased by 9.0% in wheat under NT as compared to CT. On an annual scale, the cumulative CO 2 emissions were decreased by 20.5% in NT as compared to CT. Maize season accounted for 70% 78% of soil CO 2 emissions. NT improved the aboveground biomass by 7.74% and 6.44%, and grain yields by 10.2% and 4.49% for maize and wheat, respectively. The soil CO 2 emission intensity of maize was reduced by 35.9% under NT as compared to CT. No significant differences were discovered under the two tillage practices for soil CO 2 emission intensity of wheat. For maize, NT increased the bulk density, subsequently decreasing soil temperature and increasing soil moisture. NT also led to higher soil organic carbon and total nitrogen content, ultimately resulting in a significant reduction in soil CO 2 emissions. For wheat, NT increased soil bulk density, further increasing soil moisture and lowering soil pH. NT thus resulted in lower soil organic carbon and total nitrogen content, ultimately leading to enhanced soil CO 2 emissions. Some of these observations might not be consistent with theoretical predictions, which indicated that the unconsidered factors of actual field conditions might have much significant effects. Overall, NT can be extensively used as an eco-friendly cropland tillage practice based on its positive effects of reducing CO 2 emissions and increasing crop yields. [Display omitted] • CO 2 emission variations by tillage were evaluated by the structural equation model. • No-tillage (NT) decreased CO 2 emissions by 28.7% in maize and increased by 8.99% in wheat. • Annual CO 2 emissions were decreased by 20.5% under NT than conventional tillage (CT). • Maize season accounted for 70% 78% of soil CO 2 emissions. • CO 2 emission intensity of maize was reduced by 35.9% under NT compared with CT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Tillage practice can change soil properties, regulate crop root development and nutrient availability, thus affecting crop growth and yield. However, the effect of no tillage (NT) and deep tillage (DT) on crop yield relative to conventional tillage (CT) under varied environmental and management conditions is unclear in China. We assessed the yield response of wheat and maize to NT and DT relative to CT based on collected field data (518 observations) with a meta-analysis. In general, NT led to negative yield response of both crops relative to CT, whereas maize presented a positive yield response (6.0 %) to NT in sandy soil, and crop yield responses to NT were not significantly different among environmental and management factors. DT significantly increased the yield of wheat (8.7 %) and maize (8.2 %) over CT. For wheat, the yield response to DT was similar across soil textures, climate conditions, experiment durations, N fertilizer rates, and residue managements; however, the interval DT every 2–3 years (13.2 %) and monoculture (13.9 %) increased yield response than the continuous DT (8.4 %) and double cropping system (8.9 %), respectively. The yield response of maize to DT was greater in semidry region (16.1 %) and under high N fertilizer rate (>300 kg N ha−1) (16.1 %), interval DT (12.4 %) compared with those in humid (7.5 %) and semi-humid (6.8 %) regions, low N fertilizer rates (<300 kg N ha−1) (6.9 %−7.5 %), and continuous DT (7.8 %), respectively; but other environmental and management factors did not affect its yield response. Overall, NT presented similar yield of wheat and maize to CT, while DT significantly enhanced their yields; this analysis revealed the crucial environmental and management factors influencing yield response to tillage practices in China, we also gave some suggestions on selecting appropriate tillage methods to realize high crop yield or/and agricultural sustainable development. • NT led to negative yield response of wheat and maize relative to CT. • DT significantly enhanced wheat and maize yields over CT. • Interval DT and monoculture presented better effects on crop yield response to DT. • Environmental and management factors should be considered to enhance yield using DT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intensive rice (Oryza sativa)-based cropping systems in south Asia provide much of the calorie and protein requirements of low to middle-income rural and urban populations. Intensive tillage practices demand more resources, damage soil quality, and reduce crop yields and profit margins. Crop diversification along with conservation agriculture (CA)-based management practices may reduce external input use, improve resource-use efficiency, and increase the productivity and profitability of intensive cropping systems. A field study was conducted on loamy soil in a sub-tropical climate in northern Bangladesh to evaluate the effects of three tillage options and six rice-based cropping sequences on grain, calorie, and protein yields and gross margins (GM) for different crops and cropping sequences. The three tillage options were: (1) conservation agriculture (CA) with all crops in sequences untilled, (2) alternating tillage (AT) with the monsoon season rice crop tilled but winter season crops untilled, and (3) conventional tillage (CT) with all crops in sequences tilled. The six cropping sequences were: rice-rice (R-R), rice-mung bean (Vigna radiata) (R-MB), rice-wheat (Triticum aestivum) (R-W), rice-maize (Zea mays) (R-M), rice-wheat-mung bean (R-W-MB), and rice-maize-mung bean (R-M-MB). Over three years of experimentation, the average monsoon rice yield was 8% lower for CA than CT, but the average winter crops yield was 13% higher for CA than CT. Systems rice equivalent yield (SREY) and systems calorie and protein yields were about 5%, 3% and 6%, respectively, higher under CA than CT; additionally, AT added approximately 1% more to these benefits. The systems productivity gain under CA and AT resulted in higher GM by 16% while reducing the labor and total production cost under CA than CT. The R-M rotation had higher SREY, calorie, protein yields, and GM by 24%, 26%, 66%, and 148%, respectively, than the predominantly practiced R-R rotation. The R-W-MB rotation had the highest SREY (30%) and second highest (118%) GM. Considering the combined effect of tillage and cropping system, CA with R-M rotation showed superior performance in terms of SREY, protein yield, and GM. The distribution of labor use and GM across rotations was grouped into four categories: R-W in low-low (low labor use and low GM), R-M in low-high (low labor use and high GM), R-W-MB and R-M-MB in high-high (high labor use and high GM) and R-R and R-MB in high-low (high labor use and low GM). In conclusion, CA performed better than CT in different winter crops and cropping systems but not in monsoon rice. Our results demonstrate the multiple benefits of partial and full CA-based tillage practices employed with appropriate crop diversification to achieve sustainable food security with greater calorie and protein intake while maximizing farm profitability of intensive rice-based rotational systems. • Rice-maize (R-M) outperformed over all other rice-based cropping systems considering yields and profits. • Conservation agriculture (CA) and alternate tillage (AT) outperformed than conventional tillage (CT). • R-M and rice-wheat-mungbean systems are more beneficial when layered with CA and AT. • Rice-rice system is more labor intensive and less profitable than other systems. • CA is good for winter crops and for cropping systems but not for rice but AT can be viable alternative option. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]