60 research outputs found

    The legacy effect of synthetic N fertiliser

    Get PDF
    Cumulative crop recovery of synthetic fertiliser nitrogen (N) over several cropping seasons (legacy effect) generally receives limited attention. The increment in crop N uptake after the first-season uptake from fertiliser can be expressed as a fraction (∆RE) of annual N application rate. This study aims to quantify ∆RE using data from nine long-term experiments (LTEs). As such, ∆RE is the difference between first season (RE1st) and long-term (RELT) recovery of synthetic fertiliser N. In this study, RE1st was assessed either by the 15N isotope method, or by a zero-N subplot freshly superimposed on a long-term fertilised LTE treatment plot. RELT was calculated by comparing N uptake in the total aboveground crop biomass between a long-term fertilised and long-term control (zero-N) treatment. Using a mixed linear effect model, the effects of climate, crop type, experiment duration, average N rate, and soil clay content on ∆RE were evaluated. Because the experimental setup required for calculation of ∆RE is relatively rare, only nine suitable LTEs were found. Across these nine LTEs in Europe and North America, mean ∆RE was 24.4% (±12.0%, 95% CI) of annual N application, with higher values for winter wheat than for maize. This result shows that fertiliser-N retained in the soil and stubble may contribute substantially to crop N uptake in subsequent years. Our results suggest that an initial recovery of 43.8% (±11%, 95% CI) of N application may increase to around 66.0% (±15%, 95% CI) on average over time. Furthermore, we found that ∆RE was not clearly related to long-term changes in topsoil total N stock. Our findings show that the - often used - first year recovery of synthetic fertiliser N application does not express the full effect of fertiliser application on crop nutrition. The fertiliser contribution to soil N supply should be accounted for when exploring future scenarios on N cycling, including crop N requirements and N balance schemes

    Green and animal manure use in organic field crop systems

    Get PDF
    Dual-use cover/green manure (CGM) crops and animal manure are used to supply nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) to organically grown field crops. A comprehensive review of previous research was conducted to identify how CGM crops and animal manure have been used to meet N and P needs of organic field crops, and to identify knowledge gaps to direct future research efforts. Results indicate that: (a) CGM crops are used to provide N to subsequent cash crops in rotations; (b) CGM-supplied N generally can meet field crop needs in warm, humid regions but is insufficient for organic grain crops grown in cool and sub-humid regions; (c) adoption of conservation tillage practices can create or exacerbate N deficiencies; (d) excess N and P can result where animal manures are accessible if application rates are not carefully managed; and (e) integrating animal grazing into organic field crop systems has potential benefits but is generally not practiced. Work is needed to better understand the mechanisms governing the release of N by CGM crops to subsequent cash crops, and the legacy effects of animal manure applications in cool and sub-humid regions. The benefits and synergies that can occur by combining targeted animal grazing and CGMs on soil N, P, and other nutrients should be investigated. Improved communication and networking among researchers can aid efforts to solve soil fertility challenges faced by organic farmers when growing field crops in North America and elsewhere

    An ecological future for weed science to sustain crop production and the environment. A review

    Get PDF
    Sustainable strategies for managing weeds are critical to meeting agriculture's potential to feed the world's population while conserving the ecosystems and biodiversity on which we depend. The dominant paradigm of weed management in developed countries is currently founded on the two principal tools of herbicides and tillage to remove weeds. However, evidence of negative environmental impacts from both tools is growing, and herbicide resistance is increasingly prevalent. These challenges emerge from a lack of attention to how weeds interact with and are regulated by the agroecosystem as a whole. Novel technological tools proposed for weed control, such as new herbicides, gene editing, and seed destructors, do not address these systemic challenges and thus are unlikely to provide truly sustainable solutions. Combining multiple tools and techniques in an Integrated Weed Management strategy is a step forward, but many integrated strategies still remain overly reliant on too few tools. In contrast, advances in weed ecology are revealing a wealth of options to manage weedsat the agroecosystem levelthat, rather than aiming to eradicate weeds, act to regulate populations to limit their negative impacts while conserving diversity. Here, we review the current state of knowledge in weed ecology and identify how this can be translated into practical weed management. The major points are the following: (1) the diversity and type of crops, management actions and limiting resources can be manipulated to limit weed competitiveness while promoting weed diversity; (2) in contrast to technological tools, ecological approaches to weed management tend to be synergistic with other agroecosystem functions; and (3) there are many existing practices compatible with this approach that could be integrated into current systems, alongside new options to explore. Overall, this review demonstrates that integrating systems-level ecological thinking into agronomic decision-making offers the best route to achieving sustainable weed management
    • 

    corecore