Residue retention and minimum tillage improve physical environment of the soil in croplands: A global meta-analysis

被引:174
作者
Li, Yuan [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Li, Zhou [4 ]
Cui, Song [5 ]
Jagadamma, Sindhu [6 ]
Zhang, Qingping [1 ]
机构
[1] Linyi Univ, Coll Agr & Forestry Sci, Linyi 276000, Shandong, Peoples R China
[2] Lincoln Univ, Dept Soil & Phys Sci, Lincoln 7647, New Zealand
[3] Landcare Res, Lincoln 7640, New Zealand
[4] Guizhou Univ, Coll Anim Sci, Guiyang 550025, Guizhou, Peoples R China
[5] Middle Tennessee State Univ, Sch Agr, Murfreesboro, TN 37132 USA
[6] Univ Tennessee, Dept Biosyst Engn & Soil Sci, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Conservation tillage; No tillage; Residue retention; Soil quality; Soil physics; NO-TILLAGE; CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE; HYDROLOGICAL PROPERTIES; MICROBIAL BIOMASS; ORGANIC-MATTER; BULK-DENSITY; MANAGEMENT; CARBON; QUALITY; INCREASE;
D O I
10.1016/j.still.2019.06.009
中图分类号
S15 [土壤学];
学科分类号
0903 ; 090301 ;
摘要
Conservation tillage practices, here defined as no-tillage (NT) or reduced tillage (RT) with/without residue retention, have been widely used to alleviate the negative effects caused by intensive tillage practices. Implementing effective and sustainable agriculture requires a deeper understanding of the impacts of conservation tillage practices on soil physical properties. This study examined the effects of conservation tillage practices on soil physical properties, including soil bulk density, aggregate size and stability, hydraulic properties, and soil pH; based on data collected from 264 studies published worldwide since 1980. The results indicated that no-tillage (NT), NT with residue retention (NTS), and reduced tillage (RT) increased bulk density by 1.4, 2.6, and 2.1%, respectively, compared with conventional tillage (CT). Soil bulk density decreased by 2.9% in NTS compared with NT, and 3.9% in RT with residue retention (RTS) compared with RT. The effect size of bulk density significantly decreased with the increasing experimental duration under NT and NTS practices. Compared to CT, conservation tillage practices increased aggregate mean weight diameter (MWD), geometric mean weight diameter and water stable aggregate (WSA) regardless of the residue retention or minimum tillage systems. The largest effect size of MWD (51.9%) and WSA (54.9%) appeared under NTS as compared to the CT. The effect size of MWD and WSA increased under NT with the increasing experimental duration. NT increased saturated hydraulic conductivity by 24.6% compared to CT. All conservation tillage practices increased soil available water capacity (AWC) compared with CT and NTS with a 10.2% increase in AWC compared with NT. The effect size of AWC increased under RT and NT practices with the increasing experimental duration. Soil pH decreased by 1.7 and 1.0% under RTS compared with RT and CT, respectively; and NT led to a 2.8% reduction in soil pH compared with CT. The effect size of soil pH decreased under RT and NT treatments with the increasing experiment duration. Overall, conservation tillage practices positively affected many soil physical properties; and the extent of the effects varied with the duration of the experiment.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 47 条
[1]   No-tillage lessens soil CO2 emissions the most under arid and sandy soil conditions: results from a meta-analysis [J].
Abdalla, Khatab ;
Chivenge, Pauline ;
Ciais, Philippe ;
Chaplot, Vincent .
BIOGEOSCIENCES, 2016, 13 (12) :3619-3633
[2]  
Adams DC, 1997, ECOLOGY, V78, P1277, DOI 10.2307/2265879
[3]   Avoiding pitfalls when using information-theoretic methods [J].
Anderson, DR ;
Burnham, KP .
JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2002, 66 (03) :912-918
[4]   WATER-STABLE AGGREGATES AND ORGANIC-MATTER FRACTIONS IN CONVENTIONAL-TILLAGE AND NO-TILLAGE SOILS [J].
BEARE, MH ;
HENDRIX, PF ;
COLEMAN, DC .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 1994, 58 (03) :777-786
[5]   No-tillage and soil physical environment [J].
Blanco-Canqui, Humberto ;
Ruis, Sabrina J. .
GEODERMA, 2018, 326 :164-200
[6]   No-till Induced Increase in Organic Carbon Reduces Maximum Bulk Density of Soils [J].
Blanco-Canqui, Humberto ;
Stone, L. R. ;
Schlegel, A. J. ;
Lyon, D. J. ;
Vigil, M. F. ;
Mikha, M. M. ;
Stahlman, P. W. ;
Rice, C. W. .
SOIL SCIENCE SOCIETY OF AMERICA JOURNAL, 2009, 73 (06) :1871-1879
[7]  
Blevins R. L., 1984, No-tillage agriculture. Principles and practices., P190
[8]   Seasonal and land use dependent variability of soil hydraulic and soil hydrological properties of two Northern German soils [J].
Bormann, H. ;
Klaassen, K. .
GEODERMA, 2008, 145 (3-4) :295-302
[9]   Soil structure and management: a review [J].
Bronick, CJ ;
Lal, R .
GEODERMA, 2005, 124 (1-2) :3-22
[10]   Soil organic carbon and nitrogen in a Minnesota soil as related to tillage, residue and nitrogen management [J].
Dolan, MS ;
Clapp, CE ;
Allmaras, RR ;
Baker, JM ;
Molina, JAE .
SOIL & TILLAGE RESEARCH, 2006, 89 (02) :221-231