Search

Abstract Transformative technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) make difficult tasks more accessible and convenient. Since 2018, the use of AI in research has increased drastically, with annual publication rates of 3–5 times higher than pre‐2017. Currently, >100,000 manuscripts using AI are published annually within science and engineering, and >20,000 of these belong to the agricultural and environmental fields. Given the magnitude of use, clear communication on how AI is used and how it helps advance scientific knowledge is essential. Clear communication is perhaps more necessary with AI than previous technologies due to its broad and flexible spectrum of uses, the “black‐box” nature of deep‐learning algorithms, and ongoing debates regarding AI's predictive power versus knowledge of first‐principles mechanistic and process‐based theories and models. In this commentary, we provide guidelines and discussion points to the scientific community to ensure transparent and effective communication of AI research in agricultural and environmental research publications.

Abstract Soil salinity is a global issue that impacts crop production and requires management to contain and ameliorate. Although field‐scale assessments are limited, a recent strategy used to manage salinity in the Northern Great Plains is the wide‐spread adoption of subsurface drainage. Therefore, a study was conducted between 2013 and 2021 on a 57‐ha field in southeastern North Dakota where changes in soil salinity, groundwater quality, and grain yields (soybean [Glycine max], wheat [Triticum aestivum], and corn [Zea mays L]) were compared between subsurface tile drained (TD) and undrained (UD) areas at the field scale. Topsoil (0–15 cm) electrical conductivity of saturated paste extract (ECe) decreased at a rate of 0.15 dS m−1 year−1 for TD but increased 0.03 dS m−1 year−1 for UD. The groundwater electrical conductivity of water (ECw) decreased 0.5 and 0.3 dS m−1 year−1 for TD and UD, respectively. Soil ECe, chloride (Cl−), sulfate‐sulfur (SO42−‐S), calcium (Ca2+), sodium (Na+), and magnesium (Mg2+) concentrations increased with soil depth for TD and UD. However, these ion concentrations decreased with time for TD and stayed relatively unchanged or increased for UD. Groundwater ECw and ion concentrations decreased over time for TD and to a lesser extent for UD. Groundwater levels increased slightly for TD but increased more for UD, where high water tables caused wet soil conditions resulting in yield reduction in several years. Soybean yields increase by 0.18 and 0.06 Mg ha−1 year−1 for TD and UD, respectively. Wheat grain yield increased over time for TD and UD at similar rates (0.17 and 0.18 Mg ha−1 year−1, respectively). Corn grain yield increased slightly from 2016 to 2019 for TD, but decreased by 6.2 Mg ha−1 from 2016 to 2019 for UD due to wet soil conditions. Overall, the outcomes of this field‐scale study provide validation of similar outcomes reported in small‐scale studies for subsurface drainage as a management tool for soil salinity in the Northern Great Plains.

Perennial ornamental grasses are often recommended for rain gardens, but few data support their use. We conducted two experiments to evaluate the ability of ornamental grass cultivars to grow while subjected to cyclical flooding, submergence, and drought typical of rain gardens. Our objectives were to determine the effects of cyclical flood and drought (Expt. 1) and submergence depth and duration (Expt. 2) on grass growth and survival. Seven cultivars were evaluated during greenhouse trials, including Pixie Fountain tufted hairgrass [Deschampsia cespitosa (L.) P. Beauv.], Northwind switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), Red October big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman), Purpurascens Chinese silvergrass (Miscanthus sinensis Andersson), Blue Heaven® little bluestem [Schizachyrium scoparium (Michx.) Nash], Blonde Ambition blue grama grass [Bouteloua gracilis (Kunth) Lag. ex Griffiths], and Karl Foerster feather reed grass [Calamagrostis ×acutiflora (Schrad.) DC]. During Expt. 1, grasses underwent four cycles of flooding duration (2 days or 7 days) followed by drought (drying to volumetric soil water contents of 0.14 or 0.07 cm3·cm−3). During Expt. 2, grasses were cyclically submerged at 15 or 30 cm above the soil surface for 2, 4, or 7 days, followed by floodwater removal and drainage for 2 days before being resubmerged. Cyclical submergence continued until the 7-day submergence treatments completed four cycles. Both experiments were replicated in a full factorial randomized complete block design. Controls were included in both experiments. Plants were measured to determine plant height, shoot count, visual damage rating, shoot dry weight, and root dry weight. Floodwater chemistry and soil reducing conditions were measured during Expt. 2. Chinese silvergrass and switchgrass survived cyclical soil flooding/drought and submergence for 7 days at a depth of 30 cm while maintaining acceptable foliar damage. All grasses survived cyclical flood and drought when the soil volumetric water content was maintained at 14%, suggesting they can withstand periodic soil flooding as long as the water is not too deep. As water depth and duration increased from 4 days to 7 days, little bluestem, blue grama grass, and feather reed grass experienced significant foliar damage. Tufted hair grass and big bluestem experienced significant foliar damage when submerged for 2 days. Our results showed that perennial ornamental grasses can tolerate cyclical flood and drought and periodic submergence, but that plant conditions and survival vary, which can inform strategic plant placement within rain gardens, bioretention basins, and other stormwater management systems.

Abstract North Dakota producers have adopted conservation tillage practices to conserve soil moisture and reduce wind and water erosion. As a result, an accumulation of crop residue has been observed but current recommendations encourage a fertilizer N credit in fields under no‐till for more than 6 yr. Producers are concerned that post‐harvest crop residues are not contributing to N needs of subsequent crops during the growing season. This study was established to assess N mineralization from common crop residue in conventional tillage systems using long‐term incubation studies in order to establish a baseline for future studies on no‐till systems. Three commonly cultivated North Dakota soil series were selected for study with seven residue treatments (varying C/N ratios) including corn (Zea mays L.), soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], flax (Linum usitatissimum L.), forage radish (Raphanus sativus L.), winter pea (Pisum sativum L.), spring and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), and a soil‐only control. Biweekly leachings were collected for nine incubation periods and analyzed for nitrate‐nitrogen (NO3–N). Soils with higher organic matter (OM) resulted in increased soil N mineralization (Fargo [1.63 mg kg–1 N] > Forman [0.65 mg kg–1 N] > Heimdal–Emrick [0.38 mg kg–1 N]). Radish and pea residues (narrow C/N ratios) were the only treatments showing N mineralization potential compared with the soil only controls. However, post‐harvest residues with wide C/N ratios (>25:1) promote N immobilization when compared with mineralization by the soil alone. These findings raise the question of whether the N credits for >6 yr of no‐till management are appropriate in the northern Great Plains.

Abstract Economic projections after widespread deep compaction during wet harvests are essentially nonexistent. Therefore, we project state‐level economic costs to producers in North Dakota and Minnesota for the upcoming 2020 and 2021 crops. We provide economic cost graphs as functions of grain sell prices and fractions of land impacted by deep wheel‐traffic compaction. At corn (Zea mays L.) and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] sell prices of US$3.06 bu−1 and $8.78 bu−1 for North Dakota and $3.26 bu−1 and $8.98 bu−1 for Minnesota, we estimate a minimum economic cost of US$587 million through 2021, excluding environmental externalities and other feedbacks, for every 10% of lands compacted during the 2019 harvest. Actual impacted land area may range up to 30%, resulting in a range of US$0 to $1.76 billion of actual costs. Precise large‐scale, deep‐compaction reports/sensing is needed to determine actual fractions of impacted land. Policies incentivizing conservation practices to reduce the occurrence of field traffic on wet soils are strongly encouraged.

In the US upper Midwest, the narrow growing season causes many farmers to presume yield losses when reducing tillage. The purpose of this study was to determine how four production-scale tillage systems affected residue cover, stand populations, crop yields, and soil chemical, biological, and physical properties. Tillage systems (chisel plow, fall strip-till with shanks, spring strip-till with coulters, and shallow vertical till) were continued for 4 yr. Tillage effects within a site were few and mixed (0.17–0.36 Mg ha difference), whereas site effects were common (0.50–3.00 Mg ha difference). Among 19 soil properties, only fungal/bacteria ratios differed among strip-till with shanks (0.078) and strip-till with coulters (0.066) at one site. Our results suggest that many farmers’ concerns about using conservation tillage practices do not necessarily translate into yield losses when compared to standard chisel plow practices. Economics and the level of erosion control among the tillage practices compared here, rather than yield alone, should guide farmer preferences.