Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till Soil

ABSTRACT The concept of soil physical quality (SPQ) is currently under discussion, and an agreement about which soil physical properties should be included in the SPQ characterization has not been reached. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the ability of SPQ indicators based on static and dynamic soil properties to assess the effects of two loosening treatments (chisel plowing to 0.20 m [ChT] and subsoiling to 0.35 m [DL]) on a soil under NT and to compare the performance of static- and dynamic-based SPQ indicators to define soil proper soil conditions for soybean yield. Soil sampling and field determinations were carried out after crop harvest. Soil water retention curve was determined using a tension table, and field infiltration was measured using a tension disc infiltrometer. Most dynamic SPQ indicators (field saturated hydraulic conductivity, K0, effective macroporosity, εma, total connectivity and macroporosity indexes [CwTP and Cwmac]) were affected by the studied treatments, and were greater for DL compared to NT and ChT (K0 values were 2.17, 2.55, and 4.37 cm h-1 for NT, ChT, and DL, respectively). However, static SPQ indicators (calculated from the water retention curve) were not capable of distinguishing effects among treatments. Crop yield was significantly lower for the DL treatment (NT: 2,400 kg ha-1; ChT: 2,358 kg ha-1; and DL: 2,105 kg ha1), in agreement with significantly higher values of the dynamic SPQ indicators, K0, εma, CwTP, and Cwmac, in this treatment. The results support the idea that SPQ indicators based on static properties are not capable of distinguishing tillage effects and predicting crop yield, whereas dynamic SPQ indicators are useful for distinguishing tillage effects and can explain differences in crop yield when used together with information on weather conditions. However, future studies, monitoring years with different weather conditions, would be useful for increasing knowledge on this topic.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Lozano,Luis Alberto, Soracco,Carlos Germán, Villarreal,Rafael, Ressia,Juan M., Sarli,Guillermo O., Filgueira,Roberto Raúl
Format: Digital revista
Language:English
Published: Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 2016
Online Access:http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-06832016000100510
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id oai:scielo:S0100-06832016000100510
record_format ojs
spelling oai:scielo:S0100-068320160001005102016-05-23Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till SoilLozano,Luis AlbertoSoracco,Carlos GermánVillarreal,RafaelRessia,Juan M.Sarli,Guillermo O.Filgueira,Roberto Raúl effective porosity water retention curve soil loosening pore connectivity index ABSTRACT The concept of soil physical quality (SPQ) is currently under discussion, and an agreement about which soil physical properties should be included in the SPQ characterization has not been reached. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the ability of SPQ indicators based on static and dynamic soil properties to assess the effects of two loosening treatments (chisel plowing to 0.20 m [ChT] and subsoiling to 0.35 m [DL]) on a soil under NT and to compare the performance of static- and dynamic-based SPQ indicators to define soil proper soil conditions for soybean yield. Soil sampling and field determinations were carried out after crop harvest. Soil water retention curve was determined using a tension table, and field infiltration was measured using a tension disc infiltrometer. Most dynamic SPQ indicators (field saturated hydraulic conductivity, K0, effective macroporosity, εma, total connectivity and macroporosity indexes [CwTP and Cwmac]) were affected by the studied treatments, and were greater for DL compared to NT and ChT (K0 values were 2.17, 2.55, and 4.37 cm h-1 for NT, ChT, and DL, respectively). However, static SPQ indicators (calculated from the water retention curve) were not capable of distinguishing effects among treatments. Crop yield was significantly lower for the DL treatment (NT: 2,400 kg ha-1; ChT: 2,358 kg ha-1; and DL: 2,105 kg ha1), in agreement with significantly higher values of the dynamic SPQ indicators, K0, εma, CwTP, and Cwmac, in this treatment. The results support the idea that SPQ indicators based on static properties are not capable of distinguishing tillage effects and predicting crop yield, whereas dynamic SPQ indicators are useful for distinguishing tillage effects and can explain differences in crop yield when used together with information on weather conditions. However, future studies, monitoring years with different weather conditions, would be useful for increasing knowledge on this topic.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSociedade Brasileira de Ciência do SoloRevista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo v.40 20162016-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articletext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-06832016000100510en10.1590/18069657rbcs20150160
institution SCIELO
collection OJS
country Brasil
countrycode BR
component Revista
access En linea
databasecode rev-scielo-br
tag revista
region America del Sur
libraryname SciELO
language English
format Digital
author Lozano,Luis Alberto
Soracco,Carlos Germán
Villarreal,Rafael
Ressia,Juan M.
Sarli,Guillermo O.
Filgueira,Roberto Raúl
spellingShingle Lozano,Luis Alberto
Soracco,Carlos Germán
Villarreal,Rafael
Ressia,Juan M.
Sarli,Guillermo O.
Filgueira,Roberto Raúl
Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till Soil
author_facet Lozano,Luis Alberto
Soracco,Carlos Germán
Villarreal,Rafael
Ressia,Juan M.
Sarli,Guillermo O.
Filgueira,Roberto Raúl
author_sort Lozano,Luis Alberto
title Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till Soil
title_short Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till Soil
title_full Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till Soil
title_fullStr Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till Soil
title_full_unstemmed Soil Physical Quality and Soybean Yield as Affected by Chiseling and Subsoiling of a No-Till Soil
title_sort soil physical quality and soybean yield as affected by chiseling and subsoiling of a no-till soil
description ABSTRACT The concept of soil physical quality (SPQ) is currently under discussion, and an agreement about which soil physical properties should be included in the SPQ characterization has not been reached. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the ability of SPQ indicators based on static and dynamic soil properties to assess the effects of two loosening treatments (chisel plowing to 0.20 m [ChT] and subsoiling to 0.35 m [DL]) on a soil under NT and to compare the performance of static- and dynamic-based SPQ indicators to define soil proper soil conditions for soybean yield. Soil sampling and field determinations were carried out after crop harvest. Soil water retention curve was determined using a tension table, and field infiltration was measured using a tension disc infiltrometer. Most dynamic SPQ indicators (field saturated hydraulic conductivity, K0, effective macroporosity, εma, total connectivity and macroporosity indexes [CwTP and Cwmac]) were affected by the studied treatments, and were greater for DL compared to NT and ChT (K0 values were 2.17, 2.55, and 4.37 cm h-1 for NT, ChT, and DL, respectively). However, static SPQ indicators (calculated from the water retention curve) were not capable of distinguishing effects among treatments. Crop yield was significantly lower for the DL treatment (NT: 2,400 kg ha-1; ChT: 2,358 kg ha-1; and DL: 2,105 kg ha1), in agreement with significantly higher values of the dynamic SPQ indicators, K0, εma, CwTP, and Cwmac, in this treatment. The results support the idea that SPQ indicators based on static properties are not capable of distinguishing tillage effects and predicting crop yield, whereas dynamic SPQ indicators are useful for distinguishing tillage effects and can explain differences in crop yield when used together with information on weather conditions. However, future studies, monitoring years with different weather conditions, would be useful for increasing knowledge on this topic.
publisher Sociedade Brasileira de Ciência do Solo
publishDate 2016
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-06832016000100510
work_keys_str_mv AT lozanoluisalberto soilphysicalqualityandsoybeanyieldasaffectedbychiselingandsubsoilingofanotillsoil
AT soraccocarlosgerman soilphysicalqualityandsoybeanyieldasaffectedbychiselingandsubsoilingofanotillsoil
AT villarrealrafael soilphysicalqualityandsoybeanyieldasaffectedbychiselingandsubsoilingofanotillsoil
AT ressiajuanm soilphysicalqualityandsoybeanyieldasaffectedbychiselingandsubsoilingofanotillsoil
AT sarliguillermoo soilphysicalqualityandsoybeanyieldasaffectedbychiselingandsubsoilingofanotillsoil
AT filgueirarobertoraul soilphysicalqualityandsoybeanyieldasaffectedbychiselingandsubsoilingofanotillsoil
_version_ 1756385172778909696