The effects of low and controlled traffic systems on soil physical properties, yields and the profitability of cereal crops on a range of soil types

Soil compaction is an inevitable consequence of mechanised farming systems whose machines are degrading soils to the extent that some are considered uneconomic to repair. A number of mitigating actions have been proposed but their ability to reduce or avoid damage has not been well tested. The aim of this research was to determine whether actions to reduce damage have been, or are likely to be effective and to assess whether the practice of controlled traffic farming (confining all field vehicles to the least possible area of permanent traffic lanes) has the potential to be a practical and cost effective means of avoidance. The literature confirmed that soil compaction from field vehicles had negative consequences for practically every aspect of crop production. It increases the energy needed to establish crops, compromises seedbed quality and crop yield, and leads to accelerated water run-off, erosion and soil loss. It is also implicated in enhanced emissions of nitrous oxide and reduced water and nutrient use efficiency. Replicated field trials showed that compaction is created by a combination of loading and contact pressure. Trafficking increased soil penetration resistance by 47% and bulk density by 15% while reducing wheat yield by up to 16%, soil porosity by 10% and infiltration by a factor of four. Low ground pressure systems were a reasonable means of compaction mitigation but were constrained due to their negative impact on topsoils and gradual degradation of subsoils whose repair by deep soil loosening is expensive and short lived. Controlled traffic farming (CTF) was found to be practical and had fundamental advantages in maintaining all aspects of good soil structure with lowered inputs of energy and time. On a farm in central England, machinery investment with CTF fell by over 20% and farm gross margin increased in the range 8-17%

Results from recent traffic systems research and the implications for future work

This paper reviews the results of recent traffic systems research and concludes that the evidence shows that with sufficient ingenuity by farmers and their equipment suppliers to match operating and wheel track widths, the traffic management systems that reduce soil compaction should improve crop yield, reduce energy consumption and improve infiltration rates (which will reduce runoff, erosion and flooding). These together will improve agronomic, economic and environmental sustainability of agriculture. Low ground pressure alternatives may well be the option that best suits some farming enterprises and should not be discounted as viable traffic management methods. The paper also considers the implications for further work to improve the robustness of the experimental data

The effects of low and controlled traffic systems on soil physical properties, yields and the profitability of cereal crops on a range of soil types

Soil compaction is an inevitable consequence of mechanised farming systems whose machines are degrading soils to the extent that some are considered uneconomic to repair. A number of mitigating actions have been proposed but their ability to reduce or avoid damage has not been well tested. The aim of this research was to determine whether actions to reduce damage have been, or are likely to be effective and to assess whether the practice of controlled traffic farming (confining all field vehicles to the least possible area of permanent traffic lanes) has the potential to be a practical and cost effective means of avoidance. The literature confirmed that soil compaction from field vehicles had negative consequences for practically every aspect of crop production. It increases the energy needed to establish crops, compromises seedbed quality and crop yield, and leads to accelerated water run-off, erosion and soil loss. It is also implicated in enhanced emissions of nitrous oxide and reduced water and nutrient use efficiency. Replicated field trials showed that compaction is created by a combination of loading and contact pressure. Trafficking increased soil penetration resistance by 47% and bulk density by 15% while reducing wheat yield by up to 16%, soil porosity by 10% and infiltration by a factor of four. Low ground pressure systems were a reasonable means of compaction mitigation but were constrained due to their negative impact on topsoils and gradual degradation of subsoils whose repair by deep soil loosening is expensive and short lived. Controlled traffic farming (CTF) was found to be practical and had fundamental advantages in maintaining all aspects of good soil structure with lowered inputs of energy and time. On a farm in central England, machinery investment with CTF fell by over 20% and farm gross margin increased in the range 8-17%.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Field evaluation of controlled traffic farming in central Europe using commercially available machinery

The progressive increase in the size and weight of farm machinery causes concerns due to the increased risk of soil compaction that arises from non-organized vehicle traffic. Controlled traffic farming (CTF) offers an effective means to manage compaction by confining all load-bearing wheels to the least possible area of permanent traffic lanes. Although CTF is relatively well-established in Australia and in some countries in Northern Europe, its benefits and suitability for Central European conditions have not been demonstrated. A long-term experimental site was established in 2010 in Nitra, Slovakia, using a 6 m 'OutTrac-CTF' system with shallow non-inversion tillage practices. The 16 ha experimental field of loam soil is representative of land used for arable cropping in Central Europe. Four traffic intensities (non-trafficked, one traffic event per year with a single pass, multiple passes with permanent traffic lanes, and random traffic) were evaluated using two traffic systems: controlled (CTF) and non-controlled traffic farming (referred to as random traffic farming or RTF). This article reports the findings derived from the first four years of the project and focuses on the effects of traffic systems on yields observed in cereal crops (winter wheat, spring barley, and maize) grown at the site in a rotation cycle. Significant differences (p < 0.1) in yield are reported due to the heterogeneity of the field and the seasonal effect of weather. The results of this investigation suggest that CTF systems have potential to increase production sustainably in arable farming systems in Central Europe. Well-designed CTF systems using commercially available machinery allow for reductions in the area affected by traffic of up to 50% compared with random, non-organized traffic systems. Results also show that in years when soil moisture was not limiting, the yield penalty from a single (annual) machine pass was relatively small (~5%). However, in dry years, compaction caused by multiple machinery passes may lead to yield losses of up to 33%. When considering the ratio of non-trafficked to trafficked area within the different CTF systems evaluated in this study, yield improvements of up to 0.5 t ha-1 for cereals are possible when converting from RTF to CTF. Given the assumptions made in the analyses, such yield increases translate into increased revenues of up to 117 USD ha-1 (1 Euro= 1.1 USD). For Central European farming systems, the main benefit of CTF appears to be improved efficiency and enhanced agronomic stability, especially in dry seasons, where the significant yield penalty from machinery passes is likely

Soil disturbance under small harvester traffic in paddy‐based smallholder farms in China

Machine‐induced soil disturbance may negatively impact the sustainability of a smallholder farming system. On‐farm studies at 143 fields were conducted over three crop seasons with the goal of quantifying the effect of soil disturbance on rice (Oryza sativa L.) paddy productivity induced by small harvesters (i.e., power <75 kW, weight < 3.5 Mg, and working width <2200 mm). A field survey toolbox containing fine‐layered cone penetration test, soil micro‐relief measurement, soil physics test (water content, bulk density, and porosity), documentation of field attributes, harvesters’ technical specifications, cropping systems, and farmers’ practices was used for field observation. Results showed that harvester traffic increased soil bulk density and decreased soil porosity. However, harvester‐induced soil changes in statistics were not detected. In addition, trafficked lanes had great soil strength (P = .05) than non‐trafficked lanes, and equipment induced compaction was limited to the surface 150 mm. Therefore, small harvesters minimized subsurface soil damage. However, regardless of the model and specification, all harvesters caused ruts. Small field sizes, irregular field shapes, inconsistent field management practices, lacking soil protection awareness, excessive soil water content during rice harvesting and random field traffic were identified as major factors aggravating soil disturbance. Above these, several well‐established approaches to alleviate machine‐induced soil damage were also observed during the field survey, including pre‐harvesting drainage, floating chassis, ultra‐narrow wheels, and puddling