Management of High-Residue Cover Crops in a Conservation Tillage Organic Vegetable On-Farm Setting
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Design and Cover Crop Management
2.2. Cash Crop Transplanting
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Cover Crop Height and Biomass Production
3.2. Cover Crop Termination
3.3. Volumetric Soil Moisture Content
3.4. Cash Crop Yield
- Cantaloupe. There were no significant differences in cantaloupe yield between two growing seasons (p value = 0.6995). In 2010 the yield had higher numerical value of 3037 kg ha−1 compared to 2710 kg ha−1 in 2011 (Table 7). Across two growing seasons, there was no significant difference in cantaloupe yield among three blocks (p value = 0.2906). In addition, no significant differences in the yield were present between rolling alone and rolling + ZAP, although the rolling + ZAP treatment had a higher numerical yield of 3193 kg ha−1 compared to lower yield of 2554 kg ha−1 for rolling only treatments. In 2010 cover crops did not influence cantaloupe yield (Table 7) ranging from 2382 kg ha−1 for cereal rye to 4126 kg ha−1 for conventional plots. In contrast, in 2011 growing season cover crop did have an effect on the yield with a lower 606 kg ha−1 for cereal rye and similar yields of 3823 kg ha−1 for conventional system, 2746 kg ha−1 for clover and 3665 kg ha−1 for clover/rye mixture. However, no differences found between rolling only and rolling with ZAP treatments (p value = 0.7064). Likewise, rolling treatment across two growing seasons, did not have an influence on yield (p value = 0.4521) generating cantaloupe yield of 3194 kg ha−1 for rolled + ZAP compared to 2554 kg ha−1 for rolled only treatment.
- Okra. There was a significant difference in okra yield between two growing seasons (p value = 0.0051); the yield in 2010 was 1207 kg ha−1 compared to 1603 kg ha−1 in 2011 (Table 8). Moreover, across two growing seasons, significant difference in okra yield existed among the three blocks (p value = 0.0001) and among cover crops (p value < 0.0001). In 2010 growing season, cover crops did have an effect on the okra yield, with lowest yield of 525 kg ha−1 for crimson clover/cereal rye mix, 639 kg ha−1 for crimson clover without significant difference between these cover crops, and higher yield of 839 kg ha−1 was found for cereal rye, and the significantly higher yield of 2823 kg ha 1 was obtained for conventional system compared to all cover crops. Similarly, in 2011 growing season, cover crops did influence okra yield (Table 8) ranging from the lowest yield of 935 kg ha−1 for cereal rye, followed by 1146 kg ha−1 for crimson clover (without significant difference between these cover crops) and the higher okra yield of 1472 kg ha−1 for the clover/rye mix. Compared to the cover crops used, conventional plots generated significantly higher okra yield of 2860 kg ha−1. In addition, across two growing seasons, rolling treatment did not have an influence on yield (p value = 0.9551).
- Watermelon. No significant difference existed in watermelon yield between two growing seasons (p value = 0.1760), but in 2010 the watermelon yield had higher numerical value of 6257 kg ha−1 compared to 4827 kg ha−1 in 2011 (Table 9). Across two growing seasons cover crops influenced watermelon yield (p value < 0.0001). Significant difference in watermelon yield was observed among blocks (p value = 0.0006) indicating high variability in the yield among three blocks. In addition, no significant differences in watermelon yield were found between rolling alone (5661 kg ha−1) and rolling + ZAP (5424 kg ha−1). In 2010 cover crops did influence watermelon yield (Table 9) ranging from 2382 kg ha−1 for cereal rye to 4126 kg ha−1 for conventional plots. Similarly, in 2011 growing season, cover crop did have an effect on the yield from lowest of 2258 kg ha−1 for cereal rye to the highest 8315 kg ha−1 for conventional system. There was no difference in watermelon yield in 2011 between crimson clover/rye mix (5211 kg ha−1) and crimson clover (3525 kg ha−1), but the watermelon yield for crimson clover was not statistically different than for cereal rye. The 2011 growing season showed, similar to 2010, that rolling treatment did not have an influence on yield (p value = 0.5017) generating watermelon yield of 5147 kg ha−1 for rolled compared to numerically lower yield of 4508 kg ha−1 for rolled + ZAP treatment with the conventional system having a significantly higher yield of 8315 kg ha−1.
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Crossland, M.; Fradgley, N.; Henry Creissen, H.; Sally Howlett, S.; Baresel, P.; Finckh, M.; Robbie Girling, R. An online toolbox for cover crops and living mulches. Asp. Appl. Biol. 2015, 129, 1–6, Getting the Most out of Cover Crops. Available online: orgprints.org/29405/1/1%20FRADGLEY.PDF (accessed on 15 October 2019).
- Brady, N.C.; Weil, R.R. The Nature and Properties of Soils, 12th ed.; Prentice-Hall, Inc.: Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 1999; p. 881. [Google Scholar]
- Reiter, M.S.; Reeves, D.W.; Burmester, C.H.; Torbert, H.A. Cotton nitrogen management in a high-residue conservation system: Cover crop fertilization. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 2008, 72, 1321–1329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bowen, G.; Shirley, C.; Cramer, C. Managing Cover Crops Profitably, 3rd ed.; Sustainable Agriculture Network Handbook Series, Book 9; National Agricultural Library: Beltsville, MD, USA, 2012; p. 244. [Google Scholar]
- Kornecki, T.S.; Price, A.J.; Balkcom, K.S. Cotton population and yield following different cover crops termination practices in an Alabama no-till system. J. Cotton Sci. 2015, 19, 375–386. [Google Scholar]
- Hargrove, W.L.; Frye, W.W. The need for legume cover crops in conservation tillage production. In The Role of Legumes in Conservation Tillage Systems; Power, J.F., Ed.; Soil Conservation Society of America: Ankeny, IA, USA, 1987; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Hubbell, D.H.; Sartain, J.B. Legumes—A Possible Alternative to Fertilizer Nitrogen; Florida Cooperative Extension Service Circ. SL-9; University of Florida: Gainesville, FL, USA, 1980. [Google Scholar]
- Kern, J.S.; Johnson, M.G. Conservation tillage impacts on national soils and atmospheric carbon levels. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 1993, 57, 200–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McGregor, K.C.; Mutchler, C.K. Soil loss from conservation tillage for sorghum. Trans. ASAE 1992, 35, 1841–1845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reeves, D.W. Cover crops and rotations. In Advances in Soil Science: Crops Residue Management; Hatfield, J.L., Stewart, B.A., Eds.; Lewis Publ.: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1994; pp. 125–172. [Google Scholar]
- Raper, R.L.; Reeves, D.W.; Burmester, C.H.; Schwab, E.B. Tillage depth, tillage timing, and cover crop effects on cotton yield, soil strength, and tillage energy requirements. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2000, 16, 379–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raper, R.L.; Reeves, D.W.; Schwab, E.B.; Burmester, C.H. Reducing soil compaction of Tennessee Valley soils in conservation tillage systems. J. Cotton Sci. 2000, 4, 84–90. [Google Scholar]
- Creamer, N.G.; Bennett, M.A.; Stinner, B.R.; Cardina, J.; Regnier, E.E. Mechanisms of weed suppression in Cover Crop-based production systems. HortScience 1996, 31, 410–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teasdale, J.R.; Mohler, C.R. The quantitative relationship between weed emergence and the physical properties of mulches. Weed Sci. 2000, 48, 385–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Price, A.J.; Korres, N.; Norsworthy, J.S.; Li, S. Influence of a cereal rye cover crop and conservation tillage on the critical weed free period in cotton. Weed Technol. 2018, 32, 683–690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Price, A.J.; Williams, J.; Duzy, L.; McElroy, S.; Guertal, B.; Li, S. Effects of integrated polyethylene and cover crop mulch, conservation tillage, and herbicide application on weed control, yield, and economic returns in watermelon. Weed Technol. 2018, 32, 623–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barnes, J.P.; Putnam, A.R. Rye residues contribute weed suppression in no-tillage cropping systems. J. Chem. Ecol. 1983, 9, 1045–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoffman, L.M.; Weston, L.A.; Snyder, J.C.; Reginer, E.E. Alleopatic influence of germinating seeds and seedlings of cover crops and weed species. Weed Sci. 1996, 44, 579–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chan, Y. Increasing Soil Organic Carbon of Agricultural Land; PRIMEFACT New South Wales (NSW) Government, Department of Primary Industries, 2008; p. 735. Available online: http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/210756/Increasing-soil-organic-carbon.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2019).
- Ashford, D.L.; Reeves, D.W. Use of a mechanical roller crimper as an alternative kill method for cover crop. Am. J. Altern. Agric. 2003, 18, 37–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kornecki, T.S.; Price, A.J.; Raper, R.L.; Bergtold, J.S. Effectiveness of different herbicide applicators mounted on a roller/crimper for accelerated rye cover crop termination. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2009, 25, 819–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Price, A.J.; Arriaga, F.J.; Raper, R.L.; Balkcom, K.S.; Kornecki, T.S.; Reeves, D.W. Comparison of mechanical and chemical winter cereal cover crop termination systems and cotton yield in conservation agriculture. Cotton Sci. 2009, 13, 238–245. [Google Scholar]
- Reeves, D.W. A Brazilian model for no-tillage cotton production adapted to the southeastern USA. In Proceedings of the II World Congress on Conservation Agriculture—Producing in Harmony with Nature, Iguassu Falls, Paraná, Brazil, 11–15 August 2003; pp. 372–374. [Google Scholar]
- Kornecki, T.S.; Price, A.J.; Raper, R.L. Performance of Different Roller Designs in Terminating Rye Cover Crop and Reducing Vibration. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2006, 22, 633–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kornecki, T.S.; Arriaga, F.J.; Price, A.J.; Balkcom, K.S. Effects of different residue management methods on cotton establishment and yield in a no-till system. Appl. Eng. Agric. 2012, 28, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kornecki, T.S. Multistage Crop Roller. U.S. Patent Number 7,987,917B, 2 August 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Zadoks, J.C.; Chang, T.T.; Konzak, C.F. A decimal code for the growth stages of cereals. Weed Res. 1974, 14, 415–421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kornecki, T.S.; Arriaga, F.J.; Price, A.J. Evaluation of visual and non-visible light active sensors methods to assess termination rates of cover crops. TASABE 2012, 55, 733–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anonymous. Nutrient Recommendation Tables for Alabama Crops; Agronomy and Soils Departmental Series No. 324; Alabama A&M University: Huntsville, AL, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Steel, R.G.; Torrie, J.H. Principles and Procedures of Statistics; McGraw: New York, NY, USA, 1960. [Google Scholar]
- SAS. SAS User’s Guide: Statistics. Proprietary Software Release 9; SAS Institute: Cary, NC, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Johnson, T.J.; Kaspar, T.C.; Kohler, K.A.; Corak, S.J.; Logsdon, S.D. Oat and rye over-seeded into soybean as fall cover crops in the upper Midwest. J. Soil Water Conserv. 1998, 53, 276–279. [Google Scholar]
Field Activities | Growing Season | ||
---|---|---|---|
2009 (mm/dd/yy) | 2010 (mm/dd/yy) | 2011 (mm/dd/yy) | |
Planting cover crops | 11/04/08 | 10/06/09 | 10/01/10 |
Terminating cover crops (rolling, ZAP) | 04/28/09 | 04/21/10 | 04/13/11 |
Planting watermelons and cantaloupe | 06/07/09 (watermelons only) | 05/11/10 | 05/04/11 |
Planting okra | 07/16/09 | 5/17/10 | 05/04/11 |
Harvesting watermelons | 08/14/09 to 09/15/09 | 07/15/10 to 8/16/10 | 07/13/11 to 08/15/11 |
Harvesting cantaloupe | X | 07/15/10 to 08/16/10 | 07/13/11 to 08/15/11 |
Harvesting okra | X | 06/22/10 to 08/13/10 | 06/17/11 to 08/15/11 |
Source | Cover Crop | Cash Crop Yield | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DF | Height | DF | Biomass | DF | Cantaloupe | Okra | Watermelon | |
Pr > F | Pr > F | Pr > F | Pr > F | Pr > F | ||||
Year | 2 | <0.0001 | 1 | <0.0001 | 1 | 0.7065 | 0.2362 | 0.1760 |
Cover | 3 * | <0.0001 | 2 | <0.0001 | 3 ** | 0.2589 | 0.5492 | <0.0001 |
Rolling Treatment | 1 | 0.1104 | 1 | 0.9727 | 1 | 0.4634 | 0.2325 | 0.8195 |
Block | 2 | 0.0873 | 2 | 0.0949 | 2 | 0.3085 | 0.5114 | 0.0006 |
Block * Cover | 6 | 0.4092 | 6 | 0.0737 | 6 | 0.6538 | 0.4347 | 0.0035 |
Block * Rolling Treatment | 2 | 0.5695 | 2 | 0.1829 | 2 | 0.6477 | 0.3740 | 0.7902 |
Cover Crop | Growing Season | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |||||
Height | Biomass | Height | Biomass | Height | Biomass | ||
Crimson Clover | 68.4 c * | 7198 * | 34.0 b | 2956 b | 56.5 b | 6274 b | |
Cereal Rye | 160.5 a | 7940 | 138 a | 4763 a | 164.4 a | 7052 b | |
Clover | Clover and Rye Mix | 64.8 c | 8120 | 37.9 b | 4712 a | 60.5 b | 8064 a |
Rye | 153.0 b | 132.8 a | 162.5 a | ||||
p Value | <0.0001 | 0.2382 | <0.0001 | 0.0065 | <0.0001 | 0.0151 | |
LSD | 5.7 | N/S | 8.1 | 1030 | 4.8 | 994 |
Cover Crop | Treatment | Termination Rate (%) |
---|---|---|
Cereal Rye | Rolled/crimped only | 75.0 a |
Rolled/crimped with ZAP | 75.5 a | |
Crimson Clover | Rolled/crimped only | 64.1 c |
Rolled/crimped with ZAP | 65.1 c | |
Cereal Rye and Crimson Clover Mixture | Rolled/crimped only | 71.6 b |
Rolled/crimped with ZAP | 71.1 b | |
GLM Procedure Results | p value for rolling treatment | <0.0001 |
LSD | 3.0 |
Cover Crop | TRT | Growing Season | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2009 | 2010 | 2011 | ||||||||
Days after Treatment Application | ||||||||||
7 | 14 | 21 | 7 | 14 | 21 | 7 | 14 | 21 | ||
Cereal Rye | Rolling | 56 | 84 a * | 100 a | 59 a | 63 b | 95 a | 46 b | 74 | 96 |
Rolling + ZAP | 51 | 83 a | 100 a | 57 a | 71 a | 96 a | 55 a | 71 | 96 | |
Crimson Clover | Rolling | 50 | 66 c | 91 b | 65 a | 52 c | 68 c | 29 d | 64 | 92 |
Rolling + ZAP | 54 | 72 bc | 93 b | 62 a | 52 c | 66 c | 32 cd | 66 | 91 | |
Clover/Rye Mixture | Rolling | 55 | 74 b | 100 a | 63 a | 64 b | 83 b | 41 b | 69 | 96 |
Rolling + ZAP | 59 | 77 ab | 100 a | 60 a | 60 b | 85 b | 38 bc | 67 | 93 | |
p Value | 0.37 | 0.0004 | <0.0001 | 0.0208 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | 0.37 | 0.1042 | |
LSD | N/S | 6.8 | 2.6 | 5.4 | 6.8 | 6.3 | 8.6 | N/S | N/S |
Cover | TRT | Growing Season | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2009 | 2010 | 2011 | ||||||||
Days after Treatment Application | ||||||||||
7 | 14 | 21 | 7 | 14 | 21 | 7 | 14 | 21 | ||
Cereal Rye | Rolling | 9.1 abc | 8.3 a * | 8.2 | 4.6 ab | 7.1 a | 3.0 a | 6.7 ab | 2.4 ab | 6.0 |
Rolling + ZAP | 9.4 ab | 8.4 a | 8.5 | 4.8 ab | 7.9 a | 3.0 a | 6.8 a | 3.0 a | 7.3 | |
Crimson Clover | Rolling | 9.2 abc | 7.2 b | 7.5 | 4.6 ab | 6.8 a | 1.7 c | 6.5 ab | 1.6 c | 6.7 |
Rolling + ZAP | 8.9 bc | 7.2 b | 8.1 | 4.3 b | 7.1 a | 1.8 bc | 6.8 a | 1.5 c | 5.6 | |
Clover/Rye Mixture | Rolling | 10.2 a | 9.0 a | 8.4 | 5.2 a | 8.0 a | 3.2 a | 6.6 ab | 1.7 bc | 6.3 |
Rolling + ZAP | 9.7 ab | 8.8 a | 8.2 | 4.9 ab | 7.5 a | 2.7 ab | 5.9 b | 1.8 bc | 6.3 | |
No Cover, No Rolling | 7.8 d | 6.2 c | 7.0 | 2.2 c | 5.5 b | 0.8 d | 3.1 c | 1.2 c | 6.0 | |
p Value | 0.0093 | <0.0001 | 0.1376 | <0.0001 | 0.0063 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | 0.0083 | 0.3682 | |
LSD | 1.16 | 1.02 | N/S | 0.71 | 1.31 | 0.89 | 0.83 | 0.86 | N/S |
Cover Crop | Growing Season | Average Yield over Two Growing Seasons | |
---|---|---|---|
2010 | 2011 | ||
Cereal Rye | 2382 | 606 b | 1495 |
Crimson Clover | 3461 | 2746 a | 3103 |
Clover/Rye mixture | 2179 | 3665 a | 2922 |
Conventional | 4126 | 3823 a | 3974 |
p Value | 0.7285 | 0.0117 | 0.2380 |
LSD at α = 0.10 | N/S | 1454 kg ha−1 | N/S |
Yield Averaged over Cover Crops | 3037 | 2710 | p value = 0.6995 |
Rolling Treatment: Rolling Only | 2505 | 2602 | 2554 |
Rolling Treatment: Rolling with ZAP | 3569 | 2818 | 3194 |
p Value | 0.4627 | 0.7064 | 0.4521 |
Cover Crop | Growing Season | Average Yield over Two Growing Seasons for Each Cover Crop | |
---|---|---|---|
2010 | 2011 | ||
Cereal Rye | 839 b | 935 c | 887 b |
Crimson Clover | 639 c | 1146 bc | 893 b |
Clover/Rye Mixture | 525 c | 1472 b | 999 b |
Conventional | 2823 a | 2860 a | 2842 a |
p value | <0.0001 | <0.0001 | <0.0001 |
LSD at α = 0.10 | 155 | 442 | 311 |
Yield Averaged over Cover Crops | 1207 B ** | 1603 A | p value = 0.0051 |
Rolling Treatment: Rolling Only | 1196 | 1621 | 1408 |
Rolling Treatment: Rolling with ZAP | 1217 | 1585 | 1401 |
p Value | 0.7252 | 0.8359 | 0.9551 |
Cover Crop | Growing Season | Average Yield over Two Growing Seasons | |
---|---|---|---|
2010 | 2011 | ||
Cereal Rye | 3493 b * | 2258 c * | 2876 c |
Crimson Clover | 5414 b | 3525 bc | 4470 b |
Clover/Rye Mixture | 2877 b | 5211 b | 4044 b |
Conventional | 13,244 a | 8315 a | 10780 a |
p Value | 0.0004 | 0.0060 | <0.0001 |
LSD at α = 0.10 | 2979 | 2365 | 2481 |
Yield Averaged over Cover Crops | 6257 | 4827 | p value = 0.1760 |
Rolling Treatment: Rolling Only | 6174 | 5147 | 5661 |
Rolling Treatment: Rolling with ZAP | 6340 | 4508 | 5424 |
p Value | 0.8888 | 0.5017 | 0.8195 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Kornecki, T.S.; Price, A.J. Management of High-Residue Cover Crops in a Conservation Tillage Organic Vegetable On-Farm Setting. Agronomy 2019, 9, 640. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9100640
Kornecki TS, Price AJ. Management of High-Residue Cover Crops in a Conservation Tillage Organic Vegetable On-Farm Setting. Agronomy. 2019; 9(10):640. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9100640
Chicago/Turabian StyleKornecki, Ted S., and Andrew J. Price. 2019. "Management of High-Residue Cover Crops in a Conservation Tillage Organic Vegetable On-Farm Setting" Agronomy 9, no. 10: 640. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy9100640