Ferencsik, Sándor

Rátonyi, Tamás

Acta Agraria Debreceniensis

DEA University of Debrecen Electronic Archive

AGRáRTUDOMáNyI KöZLEMéNyEK, 2014/59.paginaEvaluation of strip-tillage and conventional tillage in maize production Sándor Ferencsik – Tamás RátonyiUniversity of Debrecen Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences and Environmental Management Institute of Land Utilisation, Technology and Regional Development, Debrecenferencsik@agr.unideb.huSUMMARYTillage changes soil properties and the way how the environment affects those properties. Soil properties and environment determine the rateof water movement in liquid and gaseous form into and out of soil. Based on the experimental database of the Institute of Land Utilisation, RegionalDevelopment and Technology of the University of Debrecen, Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences and Environmental Management andthe KITE PLC, various cultivation systems were examined with maize (Zea mays L.) as indicator plant in Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok county. Thesample area can be found in the outskirts of Kenderes on a meadow chernozem soil. On the examined plot, strip-tillage, subsoiling and moldboardploughing were performed, each on 4.5 ha, respectively. The purpose of the present study is to compare these cultivation systems according tothe soil- and maize kernel moisture content and to the yield based on the years of 2012 and 2013.Keywords: soil tillage, moisture, strip-tillage, moldboard ploughing, subsoiling, maize yieldÖSSZEFOGLALÁSA talajművelés megváltoztatja a talajtulajdonságokat, valamint befolyásolja a környezeti hatások érvényesülését.  A talajjellemzők és akör nyezet együttesen határozzák meg a talaj vízforgalmát. A Debreceni Egyetem Földhasznosítási, Műszaki és Területfejlesztési Intézetének,valamint a KITE Zrt. kutatási adatbázisának alapján különböző talajművelési rendszereket hasonlítottunk össze kukorica (Zea mays L.)jelzőnövény segítségével. A kísérleti terület Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok megyében, Kenderes külterületén található réti csernozjom talajon. A vizs-gált táblán mintegy 4,5 ha őszi sávos alapműveléssel, 4,5 ha középmély-lazítással, valamint 4,5 ha őszi szántással került megművelésre. Tanul-má nyunk célja a különböző talajművelési rendszerek összehasonlítása talaj- és szemnedvesség-tartalom, valamint hozamok alapján a 2012-esés 2013-as vizsgálati éveket tekintve.Kulcsszavak: talajművelés, nedvesség, sávos művelés, őszi szántás, lazítás, kukorica hozamINTRODUCTIONMaize yields were very variable in Hungary in thelast few years. The year-to-year variability of maizeyields is primarily due to the effects of the growing-season weather. The most obvious weather influenceson maize yields is precipitation during the growingseason (Hollinger and Changnon, 1993). In Hungary,the annual average temperature increase was 0.68 °C,while the annual average of precipitation decrease was83 mm during the last century (Jolánkai et al., 2004).Tillage influences maize growth and yields bychanging soil structure and moisture removal patternsover the growing season. Soil structure and moistureremoval changes depend on soil properties, types oftillage and climatic conditions (Gruber et al., 2011). According to the terminology of the AmericanSociety of Agricultural Engineers, conventional tillageis a form of tillage, in which the operations traditionallyperformed in preparing a seedbed for a given crop andgrown in a given geographical area, while strip-tillageis a system in which 30% or less of the soil surface(bands in the row) is tilled (ASAE Standards, 2006). Itclears the crop residues in a narrow zone of soil andloosens subsoil layers prior to planting. This tillagezone in typically 20 to 30 cm wide and 25 to 35 cmdeep. The residue-covered area between these strips isleft undisturbed.Inversion tillage by moldboard ploughing is atraditional method of tillage world-wide and inHungary, too. In the last few decades, disadvantagesof soil inversion have become more evident particularlyin semi-arid or continental climates.  In a long-term soiltillage experiment Gyuricza et al. (2004) obtainedhigher soil moisture values in the reduced tillage systemscompared to moldboard ploughing, however, therewere significant differences only in the upper (0–10 cm)cultivated layer. In respect of the yields between various cultivationsystems the results are contradictory. Wysocki (1986),Lamm and Aiken (2007) reported crop yields werelower with strip-tillage than conventional tillage. Recentstudies (Vyn and Raimbault, 1993; Opuku et al., 1997)found out that there are no significant differencesbetween strip-tillage and moldboard ploughing yields,while (Ferencsik, 2013; Sulyok et al., 2013) reported thatstrip-tillage increased yield compared to conventionaltillage.The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects ofthe various cultivation systems on soil moisture content,on maize kernel moisture content and on yields. MATERIALS AND METHODSBased on the experimental database of the Instituteof Land Utilisation, Regional Development andTechnology of the University of Debrecen, Centre forAgricultural and Applied Economic Sciences and theKITE PLC, various cultivation systems were examinedwith maize (Zea mays L.) as indicator plant in Jász-Nagykun-Szolnok country. The sample area can befound in the outskirts of Kenderes (N 47°14’37”; EFerencsikS-RátonyiT:Layout 1  4/16/14  4:05 PM  Page 120°38’01”) on meadow a chernozem soil. The monthlyaverage precipitation and temperature from primarytillage until harvesting are shown in Figure 1–2. Theprecipitation was 333 mm in 2011–2012, while it was683 mm in 2012–2013.Figure 1–2: Precipitation and average temperature fromprimary tillage until harvesting in Kenderes in2011–2012 and 2012–2013Source: KITE PLC database (2013)On the examined plot, strip-tillage, subsoiling andmoldboard ploughing were performed, each on 4.5 ha,respectively. The technology of the examined cultivationsystems is shown in Table 1.Moisture content of maize was quantified withInfratec 1241 Grain Analyzer. Infratec 1241 is a wholegrain analyser which uses near-infrared transmittancetechnology to test multiple parameters (moisture,protein, oil, starch etc.) of grain and oilseed commodities.Undisturbed soil samples were taken from eachtreatment from the upper (0–10 cm) cultivated layerbefore sowing in 2012 to determine the soil moisturecontent. In 2013 the soil moisture measurements wereperformed with a Field Scout TDR 300 soil moisturemeter. Electronics in the TDR 300 generate and sensethe return of a high energy signal that travels down andback, through the soil, along the waveguide composedof the two replaceable, stainless steel rods. After usinga calibration curve to determine the soil moisture contentin the 0–20 cm layer, the meter’s period readings wererelated to volumetric water content. Determination ofthe minimum number of measurements for given errorof estimation was based on Sváb (1981) method:where:n = minimum number of measurements tp% = critical value of t-test for given probability anddegrees of freedoms = standard deviationh = error of estimationAGRáRTUDOMáNyI KöZLEMéNyEK, 2014/59.paginaTable 1.Description of the examined cultivation systemsSource: KITE PLC database (2013)                  -10-5051015202530020406080100120140IX. X. XI. XII. I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII.2011 2012Temperature ( C)Precipitation (mm)Year/monthAverage precipitation (mm) Average temperature (C)-10-5051015202530020406080100120140X. XI. XII. I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X.2012 2013Temperature (  C)Precipitation (mm)Year/monthAverage precipitation (mm) Average temperature (C) n=tp%2 ×s2h2         Strip-tillage Subsoiling Moldboard ploughing Stubble stripping Disk Disk Disk Stubble cultivation Chemical Chemical Chemical  Fertilisation (autumn) Orthman 1tRIPr (primary tillage and fertilisation at the same time)  Axis fertiliser spreader  Axis fertiliser spreader Primary tillage  Gaspardo Artiglio (7 shank)  Kühne moldboard plough (5 bottom)  Secondary tillage - Mulch finisher Mulch finisher  Seeding JD 1750 + row cleaner + fertilisation JD 1750 + row cleaner + fertilisation JD 1750 + row cleaner + fertilisation Fertilisation  Weed control JD 4730 (chemical) JD 4730 (chemical) JD 4730 (chemical) Fertilisation Injection Injection Injection Harvesting JD W540 JD W540 JD W540       Maize grain yields were adjusted to 145 g kg-1moisture.Data were analyzed using the R statistical software(R Core Team, 2012) by one way ANOVA and Duncan’smultiple-range test with the package agrocolae (Mendiburu,2013), when treatment effects were significant. Statisticalsignificance was evaluated at α=0.1. In the figurescolumns marked by the same letter have no significantdifference according to Duncan’s multiple-range test.All of the tables and figures were created with MicrosoftExcel 2007.RESULTSBefore sowing in 2012, the highest soil moisturecontent was observed in the strip-tillage treatment, inthe inter-rows (22.97 V V-1 %) and the lowest wasmeasured in moldboard ploughing (18.24 V V-1 %).FerencsikS-RátonyiT:Layout 1  4/16/14  4:05 PM  Page 2AGRáRTUDOMáNyI KöZLEMéNyEK, 2014/59.There is no significant difference between the variouscultivation systems based on the analysis of variance,except the strip-tillage inter-rows. The undisturbedsoil profile had significantly higher moisture content(Figure 3).Figure 3: Soil core sampling results in relation toeach treatment (Kenderes, 2012)Based on the determination of the minimum numberof measurements, there were taken 50 measurementswith TDR 300 soil moisture meter in each treatmentbefore sowing in 2013. Figure 4 shows the results inrelation to each treatment. Tillage effects on soil moisturecontent were significant in the upper (0–20 cm) cultivatedlayer. The highest soil moisture content was observed inthe strip-tillage inter-rows. Between the cultivated strip-tillage in-rows and subsoiling there was no significantdifference, while in the case of moldboard ploughing thelowest soil moisture content was measured, which wasalmost 10% lower than in the case of the inter-rows ofthe strip-tillage treatment.Figure 4: TDR 300 measuring results (0–20 cm) in relationto each treatment before sowing (Kenderes, 2013)2012 was an extremely droughty year. The maizeyields were significant higher in the case of strip-tillageand subsoiling treatment, then in the moldboardploughing (Figure 5) and the tendency of the maize kernelmoisture content results were similar. The maize moisturecontent was significantly higher in the case of strip-tillageand subsoiling treatment than in the moldboard ploughing(Figure 6). There was no significant difference betweenstrip-tillage and subsoiling treatment according to themaize yields and moisture content of maize kernel either.There was no significant difference between tillagesystems according to the maize yields (Figure 7) based onthe analysis of variance in 2013, but there were significantdifferences between all cultivation systems accordingto the maize kernel moisture content. The highest kernelmoisture content was in the strip-tillage treatment,while the lowest was measured in the moldboardploughing. The subsoiling technology has 1.6% lowermaize moisture content than strip-tillage and 4% higherthan moldboard ploughing (Figure 8).Figure 5: Average maize yield in various cultivation systems(Kenderes, 2012)Figure 6: Moisture content of maize kernel invarious cultivation systems (Kenderes, 2012)Figure 7: Average maize yield in various cultivation systems(Kenderes, 2013)Figure 8: Moisture content of maize kernel invarious cultivation systems (Kenderes, 2013)pagina  19.2 a22.97 b19.7 a18..24 a0510152025Strip-tillage (in-rows) Strip-tillage (inter-rows) Subsoiling Moldboard ploughingMoisture (V*V-1%)Tillage  24.57 b30.23 a24.22 b20.56 c05101520253035Strip-tillage (in-rows) Strip-tillage (inter-rows) Subsoiling Moldboard ploughingMoisture (V*V-1%)Tillage                           5.68 a5.42 a4.39 b0123456Strip-tillage Subsoiling Moldboard ploughingYield (t*ha-1)Tillage                           13.81 a13.92 a12.94 b1010,51111,51212,51313,51414,515Strip-tillage Subsoiling Moldboard ploughingMoisture (V*V-1%)Tillage                                                10.44 a 10.57 a 10.56 a024681012Strip-tillage Subsoiling Moldboard ploughingYield (t*ha-1)Tillage                                                20.55 a18.93 b14.79 c10121416182022Strip-tillage Subsoiling Moldboard ploughingMoisture (V*V-1%)TillageFerencsikS-RátonyiT:Layout 1  4/16/14  4:05 PM  Page 3ASAE Standards (2004): Terminology and Deﬁnitions for SoilTillage and Soil-Tool Relationships. Ep. 291. 2. St. Joseph. MI.USAFerencsik S. (2013): Különböző talajművelési rendszerek agro nó -miai és ökonómiai értékelése réti talajon. Agrártudományi Köz -lemények. 51: 103–106Gruber, S.–Möring, J.–Claupein, W. (2011): On the way towardsconservation tillage-soil moisture and mineral nitrogen in a long-term field experiment in Germany. Soil & Tillage Research. 115–116: 80–87.Gyuricza Cs.–Liebhard P.–Rosner J. (2004): Talajökológiai tényezőkvizsgálata talajművelési tartamkísérletekben [In: Birkás M.–Gyuricza Cs. (szerk.) Talajhasználat. Műveléshatás. Talajned-ves ség.] SZIE. Gödöllő.Hollinger, S. E.–Changnon, S. A. (1994): Response of Corn andSoybean yields to Precipitation Augmentation and Implicationsfor Weather Modification in Illinois. Champaign. Illinois. 4.Jolánkai M.–Láng I.–Csete L. (2004): Hatások és alkalmazkodás.Természet Világa. 135: 16–18.Lamm, F.–Aiken, R. (2007): Tillage and irrigation capacity effects oncorn production. ASAE Paper 072283. ASAE. St. Joseph. MI.USAMendiburu, F. (2013): Agricolae: Statistical Procedures for AgriculturalResearch. R package version 1.1-4. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=agricolaeOpoku, G.–Vyn, T. J.–Swanton, C. J. (1997): Modified no-till systemsfor corn following wheat on clay soils. Agronomy Journal. 89:549–556.R Core Team (2012): R: A language and environment for statisticalcomputing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna.Austria. http://www.R-project.org/.Sulyok, D.–Ferencsik, S.–Rátonyi, T.–Huzsvai, L.–Nagy, J. (2013):Agronomical and agro-economic evaluation of maize productionin various cultivation systems. Növénytermelés. Supplement.62: 33–36.Sváb J. (1981): Biometriai módszerek a kutatásban. MezőgazdaságiKiadó. Budapest. 50–51.Vyn, T. J.–Raimbault, B. A. (1993): Long-term effect of five tillagesystems on corn response and soil structure. Agron. J. 85: 1074–1079.Wysocki, D. (1986): A strip-till planting system for no-till fallow.PNW Conservation Tillage Handbook Series. System andEquipment. 3. Chapter 2.paginaCONCLUSIONSThe effects of primary tillage on maize kernelmoisture content were significant in both years. Themaize kernel moisture content was significantly higherin the strip-tillage and subsoiling technology comparedto moldboard ploughing. The moisture content of maizehas to be taken into consideration in the cost-benefitanalysis.Our findings show that the soil moisture contentwas affected by the primary tillage in the cultivatedlayer. On the basis of undisturbed soil samples (whichwere taken in 2012) we could not confirm differences –except for the undisturbed strip-tillage inter-rows –between tillage systems in the upper cultivated layeraccording to the soil moisture content. The soil moisturecontent was higher in the strip-tillage and subsoilingtechnology compared to moldboard ploughing in 2013.The results of this study show that we could notconfirm relationship between soil moisture contentbefore sowing and maize yields. The maize yields werehigher in the reduced (strip-tillage and subsoiling)systems than in conventional (moldboard ploughing)tillage by droughty weather conditions in 2012. Therewas no significant difference between the treatmensaccording to the maize yields in 2013. In general, our findings show, that strip-tillage andsubsoiling can be alternative tillage systems besidemoldboard ploughing on meadow chernozem soils inHungary.ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSThe research was supported by KITE PLC andKenderes 2006 Ltd.. We would like to thank dr. DénesSulyok for helping our research work. AGRáRTUDOMáNyI KöZLEMéNyEK, 2014/59.REFERENCESFerencsikS-RátonyiT:Layout 1  4/16/14  4:05 PM  Page 4

Evaluation of strip-tillage and conventional tillage in maize production

https://dea.lib.unideb.hu/dea/bitstream/2437/207920/1/file_up_ActaAgr.FS-RT.pdf

Evaluation of strip-tillage and conventional tillage in maize production

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DEA University of Debrecen Electronic Archive