Sandoiu praha

1

Conservation Tillage –Contribution of Roundup Ready

Systems

Dumitru – Ilie SandoiuUniversity of Agronomic Sciencesand Veterinary Medicine Bucharest

2

The resilience - a raport between restoration capacity and the degradation capacity

Lal (1995) proposed a funcţional relationship:

where:Sr is the soil resilienceSa – soil previous status before of antropical actionSv – forming time of new soilSd – intensity of soil degradationIm – inputs of agricultural management

Results that the soil is a renew resource as long as „Sv – Sd > 0”

Recovery time is questionable, for 2,5 cm soil deep from 30 years to 1000 years.

∫ ⋅+−+=f

i

t

t mdvar dtISSSS )(

3

Arable land surfaces suitable to conservative soil tillage systems in Roumania (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2008)

Total Flat land-low pitched Strongly-moderately sloping land

District

Thousands ha

% arable Thousands ha

% arable Thousands ha

% arable

Total România

4984 49,6 1567 15,61 3417 34,0

Minimum – Braşov

9 6,6 186 51,2 7 5,1

Maximum - Bacău

164 85,9 164 85,9

Constanţa 514 98,5 2 2,3 392 75,1

4

Suitability of Romanian soils for different tillage systems

5

Historical evolution of farming tillage systems

Pimitive system of agricultureLying fallow farming systemFalow or field farming systemAlternate farming systemConventional farming systemIntensive farming systemAlternative farming systems (chiesel, paraplow)Unconventional farming systems (No-till, 0-till,Strip drill)

6

Ways and means in conservative tillage systems assumes

Conservative tillage systems quit plowingBetween them the tillage with chiesel, paraplow anddisk bring a strong mobilization of soil

The systems as “without works” or “directseeding” (No-till) provide most benefits for soilconservation

Essentialy a large quantity of plant debris remainat the soil surface

7

Direct seeding in Paraguay

8

No-tillage in South Dacota, USA

9

No – tillage in Argentina

10

No-tillage in Brasil

11

No–tillage immediately after harvest

12

Criteria for the land suitability assessement at conservative tillage systems

For the flat and low sloping lands which are not subject to erosion:

1. Clay content, with values ranging from 13% to 32%

2. Slope gradient less than 5%

3. Excess moisture, from absent to more than moderate

4. Compaction or settling degree with values, 0% v/v (footer unsettling)

13

Criteria for the land suitability assessement at conservative tillage systems

For lands exposed to erosion processes, there are practically the same criteria but with different numerical values:

1. Clay content ranged between 13% and 45%

2. The slope gradient less than 15 – 18 %

3. The excess moisture, any

4. The compaction or settling degree, any

5. The salinity level from absent to more than moderate

14

The role of conventional and unconventional means in the tillage systems

The characteristics of the conventional tillage systems:

Depth work 20-30 cmTillage with owerthrow furrowLarge number of passes on the groundEasy mobile humus mineralizationDegradation of soil structure

15

The role of unconventional means in the tillage system

The characteristics of the unconventional tillage systems:Plow replacement with other active organ at chiesel, disc and seeder

Reducing of soil depth mobilization at 10-15 cm

Reducing of number of passes

Mulching of soil

Smoller decrease in the degree of mineralization of humus

Increasing of weed level at disk and chiesel

16

The role of means in no-tillage soil conservation with Roundup Ready system

Advantages: Increasing rate of accumulation of organic matter

Improving of hydrologic regime

Decrease of water loss through leakage and evaporation

Reducing of soil erosion losses

Modification of soil termic regime

Conservation of soil structure

Increase of soil macroporosity

Decrease of apparent density

Increasing rate of accumulation of microorganisms

17

The degree of soil surface with crop residue according to the method of loosening and pre-plant (Steiner et al., 1994, Sandoiu et al., 2010)

Tillage Fragile plants1 Unfragile plants2

Furrow plowing with returning

0 - 5 0- 10

Loosening by disk 5-15 10-20 Loosening by subsolier 60-80 70-90 Loosening by simply brush (chiesel)

40-60 60-80

Loosening by chiesel plow 30-40 50-70 Loosening by cultivation 35-50 60-70 Loosening by disk followed by smothing

30-50 50-70

Direct seeding 75-95 80-96 1) peas, beans, potatoes, soybean, sunflower, vegetables; 2) barley, wheat, oats, rice, maize, sorghum, cotton.

18

No-till system influence on water and soil loss (after Lal, 1997)

Runoff (mm)

Soil erosion (to/ha)

Soil Tillage duration years Plow till No-till Plow till No-till

Sandy loam 4 70 21 7 0,5 Loam 13 15 9 4 2,2 Silt loam 34 29 0 3 0 Clay loam 3 38 55 1 0,4 Clay 2 61 45 13 1,5

19

Soil physical characteristics

No-tilling farming impact on aggegate size and stability (after Blanco-Canqui, 2008)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

silt-loam silty clam loam loam

OHIO

Agg

rega

te m

ean

wei

ght

diam

eter

(mm

)

plow-tillageno-tillage

20

Soil physical characteristics

Crop residue influence on accumulated water quantity(after Blanca-Canqui, 2006)

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Crop residue (t/ha)

Wat

er c

onte

nt (v

/v)

21

Soil physical characteristics

Soil compactation in no-tillage soils (after Blanco-Canqui et al, 2007)

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

loamy-sand silt-loam loam

INDIANA

Con

e in

dex(

MP

a)

plow-tillageno-tillage

22

Soil physical characteristics

Crop residue influence on soil temperature on winter (after Blanca-Canqui, 2006)

-8

-7

-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

00 1 2 3 4 5 6

Crop residue (t/ha)

Soi

l tem

pera

ture

(C d

egre

es)

23

Soil physical characteristics

Crop residue influence on soil temperature on summer (after Blanca-Canqui, 2006)

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Crop residue (t/ha)

Soi

l tem

pera

ture

(C d

egre

es)

24

Soil physical characteristics

Total soil Porosity (% v/v) at differents tillage variants after 3 years in SCDA Valu lui Traian –Roumania (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2008)

The Depth (cm)

Conventionaltillage

Chisel Disk Direct Seeding

W5%

0-5 55 57 50 53 4 5-10 49 49 47 47 3 15-20 49 49 50 48 3 25-30 48 50 50 48 3 35-40 50 52 52 49 4

25

Soil physical characteristics

The tillage influence on loam soil structure (soil water stability, %) after 3 years in SCDA Valu lui Traian (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007) The Depth (cm)

Conventional tillage

Chisel Disk Direct Seeding

W5%

0-5 4 3 4 4 1 5-10 5 5 4 5 1 15-20 6 4 6 5 1 25-30 7 8 15 11 2 35-40 10 13 17 13 3

26

Soil physical characteristics

The tillage influence on chernozem soil structure (soil water stability, %) after 3 years in SCDA Brăila (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007) The Depth (cm)

Conventional tillage

Chisel Disk Direct Seeding

W5%

0-5 3 3 3 4 1 5-10 3 3 3 4 1 15-20 3 3 3 5 2 25-30 4 3 4 5 3 35-40 6 3 4 6 3

27

Agrochemical characteristics of soil at different tillage variants in SCDA Braila 2003/2004 (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007)

Depth (cm)

Plow Chiesel Disk Direct seeding

W5%

Organic carbon (%) 0-5 1,63 1,63 1,62 1,67 0,14 5-10 1,54 1,55 1,51 1,57 0,13 15-20 1,51 1,52 1,52 1,52 0,14 Humus (%) 0-5 2,81 2,81 2,82 2,87 0,14 5-10 2,65 2,65 2,60 2,70 0,23 15-20 2,59 2,60 2,60 2,61 0,24 N total (%) 0-5 0,200 0,214 0,196 0,194 0,206 5-10 0,188 0,188 0,178 0,180 0,183 15-20 0,169 0,190 0,174 0,165 0,180

28

Agrochemical characteristics of soil at different tillage variants in SCDA Braila 2003/2004 (after Elisabeta Dumitru, 2007)

Depth (cm)

Plow Chiesel Disk Direct seeding

W5%

P2O5 (mg/kg) 0-5 39 39 38 47 12 5-10 34 32 30 25 17 15-20 26 22 20 16 14 K2O (mg/kg) 0-5 269 325 286 296 21 5-10 240 274 224 237 31 15-20 211 262 167 230 42

29

Biological soil characteristics

Tillage influence on earthworm population (after Jordan et al., 1997)

020406080

100120140160180

Continoussoybean

Soybean-Corn Corn-Soybean Continous corn

Ear

thw

orm

cou

nt/s

qm

chisel + diskno - tillage

30

The influence of tillage (after maize) on vital parameter in cambic chernozem at INCDA-Fundulea (Gh. Stefanic, D. Sandoiu, 2010)

Variants Respiration CO2 mg/100 g dry soil

Cellulozolytic activity % degradated celulose

V1 - Plowing 20 cm a 14,63 a 7,06

V2 - Chiesel 20 cm b 12,64 a 10,74

V3 - Vibromixt 10-15 cm a 14,35 b 3,77

V4 – Strip-till a 18,55 a 8,31

V5 – Direct sowing a 23,27 b 6,50

DL P 5% 9,33 3,94

31

The influence of tillage (after corn) on pedoenzymaticalparameters to cambic chernozem in INCDA FUNDULEA (Gh. Stefanic, D. Sandoiu, 2010)

Variants Catalaze cmc O2 at 100 g soil dry mater

Zacharaze mg glucoză at 100 g soil dry mater

Ureaze mg NH4

+ at l00 g soil dry mater

Phosfatase mg P at l00 g soil dry mater

V1 - Plowing 20 cm a 398 b 2190 c 47,67 b 13,74

V2 - Chiesel 20 cm b 169 b 2586 a 73,04 b 13,12

V3 - Vibromixt 10-15 cm

b 192 b 2538 b 64,81 a 16,50

V4 – Strip-till b 144 a 2955 b 64,24 c 5,77

V5 – Direct sowing a 376 a 3259 a 76,31 a 18,02

DL P 5% = 105 5% = 501 1% = 9,72 5% = 6,19

32

The influence of basis tillage (after maize) evaluated by syntetics parameters (vital- IPAV, pedoenzinatical-IPAE and biological-ISB at ambic chernozem in INCDA-Fundulea (Gh.Stefanic, D. Sandoiu 2010)

Variants Indicator IPAV %

Indicator IPAE %

Indicatorul ISB %

V1 - Plowing 20 cm a 10,47 a 50,92 a 30,69

V2 - Chiesel 20 cm a 10,23 a 58,62 a 34,42

V3 - Vibromixt 10-15 cm

a 11,62 a 54,91 a 33,26

V4 – Strip-till a 12,39 a 58,85 a 35,62

V5 – Direct sowing a 11,31 a 54,71 a 34,01

DL P 5% = 4,05 5% = 12,77 1% = 6,63

33

CONCLUSIONS

No-till and RR systems are conservation tillage who requires no-till machines and RR package with seeds and herbicide;

No-till system as conservation tillage reduced water losses and soil erosion

Romania needs No-till system for 3,6 million ha

The influence on physical, chemical and biological properties is beneficial but good results appears after a longer research period

Spring sowing date should be delayed due to thermal inertia of covered soil with plant debris

34

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION