Keywords
Crop residue, Crop rotation, Soil erosion, Soil water infiltration, Sustainable agriculture
This article is included in the Agriculture, Food and Nutrition gateway.
Crop residue, Crop rotation, Soil erosion, Soil water infiltration, Sustainable agriculture
Soil degradation is a major constraint of food security (Gomiero, 2016; Lal, 2015), and soil erosion represents one of the crucial intervention points for reversing soil degradation (Karlen & Rice, 2015). The no-tillage method is a major approach to tackle erosion; however, tillage remains a major management approach on arable land. The Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) (Wischmeier & Smith, 1978) is the standard for estimating erosion. The equation shows that the risk of erosion is reduced when a crop has covered soil surface. This emphasizes the importance of preventing erosion in the early stage of crop growth. In general, it is rare for rain intensity to exceed 30 mm 10 min−1 (Kouhei et al., 2011). Therefore, surface runoff after tillage almost never occurs if the infiltration rate of a field is larger than 30 mm 10 min−1. Therefore, technologies increasing the infiltration rate higher than the precipitation rate are needed to prevent soil erosion in tillage systems.
Crop residue management is a crucial factor in the early stage of crop growth. Tillage makes soil porous, but the physical properties are rapidly lost (Strudley et al., 2008). However, organic matter application increases the stability of soil pores (Turmel et al., 2015). Potter et al. (1995) reported that water infiltration of soil was higher under no-tillage than tillage conditions when the residue input was low, but the opposite result was shown when the residue input was high. The soil erosion decreased according to the degree of water infiltration (Potter et al., 1995). Just after residue incorporation, rill erosion rates were significantly reduced (Brown et al., 1989). A previous study reported that surface water runoff under normal subtillage reduced up to the applied wheat straw quantity, as the water infiltration increased with the quantity of applied straw (Russel, 1940), although the relation between the quantity of applied residue and infiltration rate has been less studied. Conversely, it is known that plant root mass is related to rill and ephemeral gully erosion (Gyssels et al., 2005).
Our research aims were as follows: 1) to determine whether the relation between residue incorporation and infiltration holds under crop rotation, and 2) to determine whether the remaining underground root mass influences this relation. To address these questions, we designed an experiment that involved ensuring growth of different crops for the same amount of input residue with different nutrition levels and different soil moisture levels.
We conducted the experiment in two plastic film houses at the Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences experimental field (24.38°N and 124.19°E) on Ishigaki Island. The climate is subtropical. The soil type was Ultisol (Soil Survey Staff, 2014) and the texture was sandy clay loam. The house was 5 m wide and 18 m long. We made three soil ridges (0.2 m high and 1 m wide) with a 0.5 m path on each side. We divided these ridges into three plots with 0.8 m paths between each plot. In this way, we created nine plots (1 m × 5.2 m) in each film house and randomly assigned them with nine treatments (3 × 3 factorial design). These treatments comprised three nitrogen levels (0, 10, and 40 kg N ha−1; slow-release-type urea only, no other fertilizers were used) and three soil moisture levels (unmulched, weed barrier fabric, and black plastic film mulch).
The effect of the soil moisture difference treatment was determined at the end of okra cropping by extracting soil core samples from 0 to 5 cm soil depth on the ridge. We replicated the treatments using two film houses (A and B). We cropped corn (Zea mays) without fertilizer before the experiment and collected the residue, then chopped the residue into approximately 3 cm pieces using a chopper and dried it for a month under a roof. We adjusted the soil moisture of the house at a suitable level for tillage by irrigating (25–40 mm) with mist irrigation tubes (Kiriko; Mitsubishi Chemical Agri Dream Co., Ltd., Tokyo) and then removed the tubes. We scattered 2 Mg ha−1 of the corn residue, tilled by a rotary tiller, made the ridges, measured the soil water infiltration, set the irrigation tubes again, set the mulch films, transplanted rose grass (Chloris gayana) seedlings with fertilizer, and irrigated up to the field capacity. Additional irrigation was not provided. After harvesting rose grass, we repeated the above processes in the same way for okra (Abelmoschus esculentus). All the crop residues were collected in each house then evenly returned to the plots (each plot received the same amount of residue for the next crop per house; the amount was different between the houses). The growing season of corn, rose grass, and okra were 7 June to 10 August 2016, 14 October 2016 to 11 January 2017, and 12 January to 14 April 2017, respectively. An interval of 65 days was provided between the corn harvesting and the rose grass planting. There was no interval between rose grass harvesting and okra planting.
We measured the soil water infiltration rate with Mariotte's bottle (20 cm high, 10 cm in diameter), with two holes in the bottom. Mariotte’s bottle is a device that delivers a constant rate of flow. We inserted a plastic ring of the same diameter into the ridge to a 10 cm depth and then watered from a 1 m height to the ring at a 60 mm min−1 rate. We recorded the time needed to waterlog 50% of the soil surface area. We measured infiltration on the ridge at the initial stage (before the rose grass; with incorporated corn residue), after the rose grass (with incorporated rose grass residue), and after the okra (with incorporated okra residue).
Aboveground biomass was calculated by multiplying the plot’s whole fresh biomass weight to the average moisture content of the air-dried samples’ in each house. We performed Pearson’s product moment correlation analysis of the infiltration rate for the quantity of applied residue or for the aboveground biomass (dry weight) using the “CORREL” function of MS Excel 2016. The correlation coefficients were calculated for the mean values of nitrogen levels and for that of the mulch levels. The mean values of nitrogen levels show the effects of aboveground biomass, which averaged out the effect of soil moisture. By contrast, the mean values of mulch levels show the effect of soil moisture.
The incorporated residues of each house were 2.0 and 2.0 Mg ha−1 for the initial stage (before seeding the rose grass), 3.8 and 4.7 Mg ha−1 after the rose grass, and 0.8 and 0.8 Mg ha−1 after the okra. The corresponding infiltration rates were 45 and 36 mm, 97 and 123 mm, and 32 and 47 mm, respectively. There was a strong correlation between the quantity of incorporated residue dry weight and soil water infiltration rate (r = 0.953) in terms of nitrogen level treatment, although initial corn residue showed outliers (Figure 1a). However, aboveground biomass of the prior crop showed a higher correlation with soil water infiltration rate (r = 0.965), without outliers (Figure 1b). The correlation coefficient of the infiltration rate and the aboveground weight decreased to r = 0.872 for the mulch level treatment (Figure 1c). The soil moisture (0–5 cm) of the N0, N1, and N4 treatment at the end of okra cropping was 8.3% (±1.6%), 7.2% (±1.0%), and 7.8% (±1.7%), respectively (Oda et al., 2018). The soil moisture of the unmulched, the fabric, and the film treatments were 6.5% (±0.7%), 7.6% (±0.8%), and 9.7% (±0.9%), respectively (Oda et al., 2018).
(a, b) Means of the nitrogen-level treatment. (c) Means of the mulch-level treatment. Crop rotation was conducted as follows: corn, rose grass, and okra in plastic film houses. An interval of 65 days was provided between the corn harvesting and the rose grass planting. There was no interval between rose grass harvesting and okra planting. Houses A and B are replicates. We measured the soil infiltration rates on the ridge using artificial rainfall equipment on the day of making the ridge. The values are the mean of three plots.
We found a strong correlation between input residue and the infiltration rates for the nitrogen-level treatment (Figure 1a). However, the average infiltration rate of initial stage was almost the same as that of after okra, although the input quantity of the initial stage (2.0 Mg ha−1) was a 2.5-fold higher than after okra (0.8 Mg ha−1). By contrast, the correlation for the aboveground biomass had no outliers (Figure 1b). This reveals that aboveground biomass affects infiltration rate more than the applied residue. A previous study has shown that the decrease in water erosion rates with increasing root mass is exponential, although infiltration was not mentioned (Gyssels et al., 2005). Our data show a positive relationship between resistance to erosion and root mass when assuming that aboveground biomass is proportional to the underground biomass.
The mulch treatment data shows that correlation between the aboveground weight and infiltration rate was erratic (Figure 1c). The soil moisture difference caused large differences in aboveground growth. In addition, the unit performance of infiltration was not stable. The difference of soil water content at most 3.2% (6.5% of the unmulched and 9.7% of the film) in top 5 cm was negligible against the 25–40 mm of applied water before measurement for making the ridge. Therefore, it is considered that the outliers did not come from the difference of soil moisture but came from the difference of root mass, which was affected by the soil dryness.
We should consider the duration of the “after-effect” of the prior crop, such as the roots of rose grass on the soil water infiltration rate measurement of after okra (Wischmeier & Smith, 1978). Two facts support the observation of a small after-effect. Firstly, the infiltration rates were very small (32 and 47 mm) after okra, although they were very large (97 and 123 mm) after rose grass. Secondly, the correlation between the aboveground biomass and the infiltration rate was stable and less was affected by a prior crop. Therefore, we conclude that the effect of the prior crop root mass almost disappears within the next crop growth period under the experimental conditions.
Finally, the key finding of this study is that the effect of aboveground residue quantity, more precisely root mass, was stronger than the incorporated residue. Although the residue quantity was the main factor determining the infiltration rates at tillage, the fairly low performance of initial corn residue is remarkable. This is likely to be because interval between harvesting corn and rose grass planting was very high (65 days). The soil pores would have been decreased. From a physical viewpoint, the area of residue surface is far smaller than that of the root surface. And the gap is easily clogged by sediment caused by rainfall. Therefore, the improvement of soil water infiltration probably comes from root mass (Gyssels et al., 2005). This suggests the importance of sequential cropping in tropical regions.
Raw data of this article are presented in figshare: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.6741890.v1 (Oda et al., 2018).
Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).
We thank Masato Shimajiri, Yasuteru Shikina, Masashi Takahashi and Masahide Maetsu for their assistance with experiment. We thank Akiko Sawa for her assistance with the sample analysis.
Views | Downloads | |
---|---|---|
F1000Research | - | - |
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
|
- | - |
Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature?
Partly
Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound?
No
Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others?
Partly
If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate?
No
Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility?
Partly
Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results?
No
Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed.
Reviewer Expertise: soil science, vegetable cultivation
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Invited Reviewers | |||
---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | |
Version 7 (revision) 05 Mar 20 |
read | read | |
Version 6 (revision) 05 Feb 20 |
read | ||
Version 5 (revision) 04 Dec 19 |
read | read | |
Version 4 (revision) 21 Oct 19 |
read | read | |
Version 3 (revision) 22 Aug 19 |
read | read | |
Version 2 (revision) 05 Mar 19 |
read | ||
Version 1 21 Sep 18 |
read |
Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list:
Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles
Already registered? Sign in
The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.
You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.
You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.
To sign in, please click here.
If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.
If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password.
If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance.
Comments on this article Comments (0)