Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
-
Upload
nishant-sinha -
Category
Documents
-
view
231 -
download
0
Transcript of Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
1/12
Conservation Agriculture Practices in Enhancing Nutrient
Use Efficiency/ Resource Conservation
J. Somasundaram* R.S.Chaudhary and N.!.Sinha
Indian Institute of Soil Science, Nabibagh, Berasia Road, Bhopal-462038 !"#
$%&ail' so&a(a)ara&an*)ahoo+co+in
"ntroduction
Our mother soils are generally taken for granted for many uses. Most people do not
recognize the importance of soil resource. Soils are fundamental material for farming/agriculture.
Without high quality soils, agriculture production cannot e attained on sustainale asis. !hus,
con"ersion from con"entional practices to conser"ation agriculture #ill help in sustaining soil health.
$o%till/conser"ation agriculture production systems are capale of impro"ing the soil health y
increasing organic caron, aggregation, impro"ing infiltration, minimising erosion losses, etc.
&onser"ation agriculture '&() practices in"ol"e minimum soil disturance, pro"iding a soil
co"er through crop residues or other co"er crops, and crop rotations for achie"ing higher producti"ity.
!his has emerged as #ay for transition to the sustainaility of intensi"e cropping systems. !he key
features of &( include* 'i) minimum soil disturance y adopting no tillage and minimum traffic for
agricultural operations, 'ii) lea"e and manage the crop residues on the soil surface, 'iii) adopt spatial
and temporal crop sequences / crop rotations to deri"e ma+imum enefits from inputs and minimize
ad"erse en"ironmental impacts. n the con"entional systems in"ol"ing intensi"e tillage, there is
gradual decline in soil organic matter through accelerated o+idation and urning of crop residues
causing pollution, greenhouse gases emission and loss of "aluale plant nutrients. ntensi"e seed%ed
preparation #ith hea"y machinery lead to declining soil fertility, iodi"ersity and erosion. When the
crop residues are retained on soil surface in comination #ith no tillage, it initiates processes that lead
to impro"ed soil quality and o"erall resource enhancement. !herefore, conser"ation agriculture
practices may lead to sustainale impro"ements in the efficient use of #ater and nutrients y
impro"ing nutrient alances and a"ailaility, infiltration and retention y soils reducing #ater losses
due to e"aporation, and impro"ing the quality and a"ailaility of ground and surface #ater. When the
crop residues are retained on soil surface in comination #ith no tillage, it initiates processes that lead
to impro"ed soil quality and o"erall resource enhancement.
1
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
2/12
Elements of a Nutrient #anagement Strategy in CA$
$utrient management strategies in &( systems #ould need to attend to the follo#ing four
general aspects, namely that* 'i) the iological processes of the soil are enhanced and protected so that
all the soil iota are microorganisms are pri"ileged and that soil organic matter and soil porosity are
uilt up and maintained- 'ii) there is adequate iomass production and iological nitrogen fi+ation for
keeping soil energy and nutrient stocks sufficient to support higher le"els of iological acti"ity, and
for co"ering the soil- 'iii) there is an adequate access to all nutrients y plant roots in the soil, from
natural and synthetic sources, to meet crop needs- and 'i") the soil acidity is kept #ithin acceptale
range for all key soil chemical and iological processes to function effecti"ely.
%o&ards CA'(ased Nutrient #anagement Practices
ntegrated Soil ertility Management 'SM) and ntegrated $atural resources Management '$M)
approaches of "arious types and nomenclature ha"e een in "ogue in recent years in certain sections
of the scientific community. 0enerally, such approaches are focused more on meeting crop nutrient
needs rather than managing soil health and land producti"ity as is the case #ith &( systems. (lso,
most of the #ork that is couched under the ruric of SM or $M o"er the past 12 years or so has
een geared to#ards tillage%ased systems #hich ha"e many unsustainale elements, regardless of
farm size or the le"el of agricultural de"elopment. 3nless the concepts of soil health and function are
e+plicitly incorporated into SM or $M approaches, sustainaility goals and means #ill remain
only accidentally connected, and sustainale crop intensification #ill e difficult to achie"e
particularly y resource poor farmers. We elie"e that &( systems ha"e #ithin them their o#n
particular sets of SM or $M processes and concepts that comine and optimize the use of organic
#ith inorganic inputs integrating temporal and spatial dimensions #ith soil, nutrient, #ater, soil iota,
iomass dimension, all geared to enhancing crop and system outputs and producti"ities ut in
en"ironmentally responsile manner. !here is empirical e"idence to sho# that &( ased SM or
$M processes can #ork ecause of the underpinnings of soil health and function.
ocusing on soil fertility ut #ithout defining the tillage and cropping system, as often
proposed y SM or $M approaches, is only a partial ans#er to enhancing and maintaining soil
health and producti"ity in support of sustainale production intensification, li"elihood and the
en"ironment. O"er the past t#o decades or so, empirical e"idence from the field has clearly sho#n
that healthy agricultural soils constitute iologically acti"e soil systems #ithin landscapes in #hich
oth the soil resources and the landscape must operate #ith plants in an integrated manner to support
the "arious desired goods and ser"ices 'e.g., food, feed, feedstock, iological ra# material for
industry, li"elihood, en"ironmental ser"ices, etc) pro"ided y agricultural land use. &onsequently,
successful nutrient management strategies as part of any SM or $M approach must pay close
2
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
3/12
attention to issues of soil health management #hich means managing the microscopic integrity of the
soil plant system particularly as mediated y soil li"ing iota, soil organic matter, soil physico%
chemical properties, a"ailale soil nutrients, adapted germplasm as #ell as to managing the
macroscopic dimensions of landscapes, socioeconomics and policy. 0i"en that &( principles and
practices offer sustantial enefits to all types of farmers in most agro%ecological and socio%economic
situations, &(%ased SM and $M approaches to nutrient management and production
intensification #ould e more effecti"e for farmer%ased inno"ation systems and learning processes
such as those promoted through armer ield School net#orks.
Ado)ting a CA'(ased Nutrient #anagement rame&or+
&( has no# emerged as a ma4or 5reakthrough6 systems approach to crop and agriculture production
#ith its change in paradigm that challenges the status quo. 7o#e"er, as a multi%principled concept,&( translates into kno#ledge%intensi"e practices #hose e+act form and adoption requires that farmers
ecome intellectually engaged in the testing, learning and fine tuning possile practices to meet their
specific ecological and socio%economic conditions 'riedrich and 8assam 9::;). n essence, &(
approach represents a highly iologically and io%geophysically%integrated system of soil health and
nutrient management for production that generates a high le"el of 5internal6 ecosystem ser"ices #hich
reduces the le"els of 5e+ternal6 susidies and inputs needed. &( pro"ides the means to #ork #ith
natural ecological processes to harness greater iological producti"ities y comining the potentials of
the endogenous iological processes #ith those of e+ogenous inputs. !he e"idence for the uni"ersal
applicaility of &( principles is no# a"ailale across a range of ecologies and socio%economic
situations co"ering large and small farm sizes #orld#ide, including resource poor farmers '0oddard
et al. 9::
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
4/12
nutrient management inter"entions that may e proposed can contriute to the system effecti"eness as
a #hole oth in the short% and long%term.
Conservation agriculture and soil organic car,on$
When comparing SO& in different management practices, se"eral factors ha"e to e taken into
account. (s reported, ulk density can e affected y tillage practices. f ulk density increases after
con"ersion from con"entional tillage to zero tillage, and if samples are taken to the same depth #ithin
the surface soil layer, more mass of soil #ill e taken from the zero tillage soil than from the
con"entionally tilled soil. !his could increase the apparent mass of SO& in the zero tillage and could
#iden the difference et#een the t#o systems if there is significant SO& eneath the ma+imum depth
of sampling 'AandenBygaart and (ngers 9::>). !herefore, Cllert and Bettany '1;;2) suggested
asing calculations of SO& on an equi"alent soil mass rather than on genetic horizons or fi+edsampling depths in order to account for differences in ulk density. !illage practice can also influence
the distriution of SO& in the profile #ith higher SO& content in surface layers #ith zero tillage than
#ith con"entional tillage, ut a higher content of SO& in the deeper layers of tilled plots #here
residue is incorporated through tillage 'Dantalia et al. 9::). Blanco%&anqui and @al '9:: Mg ha%1 on a dry matter asis) of
#heat stra# applied annually on SO& under zero tillage on an (eric Cpiaqualf in central Ohio.
O"erall, SO& from : to 2: cm depth #as =9.2 Mg ha%1 in the unmulched soil, ;E.1 Mg ha%1 #ith =
Mg ha%1 mulch, and 1:E.; Mg ha%1 #ith 1> Mg ha%1 mulch. !he rate of decomposition of crop
residues depends not only on the amount retained, ut also on soil characteristics and the composition
4
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
5/12
of the residues. !he composition of residues left on the field% the solule fraction, lignin, hemic
'cellulose) and polyphenol contentH#ill determine its decomposition 'Sakala et al. 9:::). !he
solule fraction is decomposale 'Sakala et al. 9:::) and can stimulate the decomposition of the
'hemi) cellulose 'Aanlau#e et al. 1;;E). @ignin is resistant to rapid microial decomposition and can
promote the formation of a comple+ phenyl%propanol structure, #hich often encrusts the cellulose,
hemicellulose matri+ and slo#s decomposition of these components 'Sanger et al. 1;;>).
&onser"ation agriculture is not a single component technology ut a system that includes the
cumulati"e effect of all its three asic components. !he crop intensification component #ill result in
an added effect on SO& in zero tillage systems. West and Iost '9::9) reported that although relati"e
increases in SO& #ere small, increases due to the adoption of zero tillage #ere greater and occurred
much faster in continuously%cropped than in fallo#%ased rotations. Sisti et al. '9::E) found that
under a continuous sequence of #heat '#inter) and soyaean 'summer) the concentrations of SO& to
1:: cm depth under zero tillage #ere not significantly different from those under con"entional tillage.
7o#e"er, in the rotations #ith "etch planted as a #inter green%manure crop, SO& concentrations #ere
appro+imately 1< Mg haJ1 higher under zero tillage than under con"entional tillage. t appears that
the contriution of $9 fi+ation y the leguminous green manure '"etch) in the cropping system #as
the principal factor responsile for the oser"ed & accumulation in the soil under zero tillage, and that
most accumulated & #as deri"ed from crop roots. !o otain an accumulation of SOM there must e
not only a & input from crop residues ut a net e+ternal input of $ e.g. including an $%fi+ing green
manure in the crop rotation 'Sisti et al. 9::E). &on"entional tillage can diminish the effect of an $
fi+ing green%manure either ecause the $%input can e reduced y soil mineral $ release or the $ can
e lost y leaching '$OF J) or in gaseous forms '"ia denitrification or $7F "olatilization) due to
SOM mineralization stimulated y tillage '(l"es et al. 9::9). 7ence, intensification of cropping
practices y the elimination of fallo# and mo"ing to#ard continuous cropping, is the first step to#ard
increased SO& contents. educing tillage intensity, y the adoption of zero tillage enhances the
cropping intensity effect.
Conservation agriculture and Nutrient availa,ility$
!illage, residue management and crop rotation ha"e a significant impact on nutrient distriution and
transformation in soils '0alantini et al. 9:::, Ctana et al. 1;;;), usually related to the effects of
conser"ation agriculture on SO& contents. Similar to the findings on SO&, distriution of nutrients in
a soil under zero tillage is different to that in tilled soil. ncreased stratification of nutrients is
generally oser"ed, #ith enhanced conser"ation and a"ailaility 'ranzlueers and 7ons 1;;>). !he
altered nutrient a"ailaility under zero tillage compared to con"entional tillage may e due to surface
placement of crop residues in comparison #ith incorporation of crop residues #ith tillage 'smail etal. 1;;E). Slo#er decomposition of surface placed residues 'Balota et al. 9::E, 8ush#aha et al. 9:::)
5
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
6/12
may pre"ent rapid leaching of nutrients through the soil profile, #hich is more likely #hen residues
are incorporated into the soil. 7o#e"er, the possile de"elopment of more continuous pores et#een
the surface and the susurface under zero tillage may lead to more rapid passage of solule nutrients
deeper into the soil profile than #hen soil is tilled 'ranzlueers and 7ons 1;;>). urthermore, the
response of soil chemical fertility to tillage is site%specific and depends on soil type, cropping
systems, climate, fertilizer application and management practices 'ahman et al. 9::=).
!he density of crop roots is usually greater near the soil surface under zero tillage compared
to con"entional tillage 'Kin et al. 9::E). !his may e common under zero tillage as in the study of
Mackay et al. '1;=, @am et al. 1;=2). (ccording to Schoenau and &ell '1;;>), a greater immoilization in
conser"ation agriculture can enhance the conser"ation of soil and fertilizer $ in the long run, #ith
higher initial $ fertilizer requirements decreasing o"er time ecause of reduced losses y erosion and
the uild%up of a larger pool of readily mineralizale organic $.
!illage increases aggregate disruption, making organic matter more accessile to soil
microorganisms 'Si+ et al. 9::9, Beare et al. 1;;E) and increasing mineral $ release from acti"e and
physically protected $ pools '8ristensen et al. 9:::). @ichter et al. '9::=) reported that permanentraised eds #ith residue retention resulted in more stale macro aggregates and increased protection
6
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
7/12
of & and $ in the micro aggregates #ithin the macro aggregates compared to con"entionally tilled
raised eds. !his increases susceptiility to leaching or denitrification if no gro#ing crop is ale to
take ad"antage of these nutrients at the time of their release 'andall and raga"arapu 1;;2,
&hristensen et al. 1;;E, Goran 1;=:). andall and raga"arapu '1;;2) reported aout 2 higher $OF%
$ losses #ith con"entional tillage compared to zero tillage. Do#kin and Schoenau '1;;=) report that $
a"ailaility #as not greatly affected in the initial years after s#itching to zero tillage in the ro#n soil
zone in &anada. Other authors reported that $%mineralization rate increased as tillage decreased*
@arney et al. '1;;). (fter 9: years of zero tillage, e+tractale I #as E9 greater at :%2 cm, ut
=%1= lo#er at 2%F: cm depth compared #ith con"entional tillage in a silt loam 'smail et al. 1;;E).
(lso 3nger '1;;1) and Mato#o et al '1;;;) found higher e+tractale I le"els in zero tillage compared
to tilled soil in the topsoil. (ccumulation of I at the surface of continuous zero tillage is commonly
oser"ed 'e.g. ranzlueers and 7ons 1;;>, Cd#ards et al. 1;;9, ollett and Ieterson 1;==, Cckert
and Dohnson 1;=2, 7argro"e et al. 1;=9). &oncentrations of I #ere higher in the surface layers of all
tillage systems as compared to deeper layers, ut most strikingly in zero tillage 'Guiker and Beegle
9::>). When fertilizer I is applied on the soil surface, a part of I #ill e directly fi+ed y soil
7
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
8/12
particles. When I is anded as a starter application elo# the soil surface, authors ascried I
stratification partly to recycled I y plants 'Guiker and Beegle 9::>, Cckert and Dohnson 1;=2).
Guiker and Beegle '9::>) suggest there may e less need for I starter fertilizer in long%term zero
tillage due to high a"ailale I le"els in the topsoil #here the seed is placed. Geeper placement of I in
zero tillage may e profitale if the surface soil dries out frequently during the gro#ing season as
suggested y Mackay et al. '1;=). ollett and Ieterson '1;==) oser"ed either
higher or similar e+tractale 8 le"els in zero tillage compared to mouldoard tillage, #hile oldan et
al. '9::). Cd#ards et al. '1;;9), ho#e"er, oser"ed higher e+tractale &a concentrations #ith zero
tillage than #ith con"entional tillage on an 3ltisol, #hich they attriuted to the higher SOM contentunder zero tillage. !he same conclusion #as reached y Sidiras and Ia"an '1;=2) #ho found
increased a"ailale &a and Mg concentrations to >: cm depth in oth an o+isol and alfisol in Brazil.
n contrast, Ble"ins et al '1;=F) reported lo#er e+tractale &a under zero tillage than con"entional
tillage.
#icronutrient cations and aluminium$
ncreasing supply to food crops of essential micronutrients might result in significant increases in
their concentrations in edile plant products, contriuting to consumers health 'Welch 9::9).
8
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
9/12
Micronutrient cations '?n, e, &u and Mn) tend to e present in higher le"els under zero tillage #ith
residue retentions compared to con"entional tillage, especially e+tractale ?n and Mn near the soil
surface due to surface placement of crop residues 'ranzlueers and 7ons 1;;>). n contrast,
0o"aerts et al. '9::
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
10/12
&C& and nutrient a"ailaility increase in the topsoil. $umerous studies ha"e reported higher
e+tractale I le"els in zero tillage than in tilled soil largely due to reduced mi+ing of the fertilizer I
#ith the soil, leading to lo#er I%fi+ation.
References$
Baker, D.M., Ochsner, !.C., Aenterea, .!., and 0riffis, !.D. 9::
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
11/12
riedrich, !. and 8assam, (.7. 9::;. (doption of &onser"ation (griculture !echnologies* &onstraints
and Opportunities. n"ited paper, A World &ongress on &onser"ation (griculture, E%< eruary
9::;, $e# Gelhi, ndia.
0alantini, D.(., @andriscini, M.., glesias, D.O., Miglierina, (.M., and osell, .(. 9:::. !he effects
of crop rotation and fertilization on #heat producti"ity in the Iampean semiarid region of
(rgentina 9. $utrient alance, yield and grain quality. Soil Till. Res. 2F*1F*12F%1>>.
@anders, D. 9::F*19F%1F9.
Mackay, (.G., 8ladi"ko, C.D., Barer, S.(., and 0riffith, G.. 1;=
-
7/26/2019 Conservation Ag and Nutrient Use Efficiency
12/12
Mohamed, (., 7ardtle, W., Dir4ahn, B., $iemeyer, !., and "on Oheim, 0. 9::