Browse on keywords: tillage water use
Search results on 05/21/13
1360. Cochran, V.L., L.F. Elliott, and R.I. Papendick. 1982. Effect of crop residue management and tillage on water use efficiency and yield of winter wheat.. Agron. J. 74:929-932.
5539. Ramig, R.E.. 1987. Conservation tillage systems for green pea production in the Pacific Northwest.. IN: J.F. Power (ed.). The role of legumes in conservation tillage systems. p. 93-94.
Summarizes a 13 yr study of the effects of 4 tillage systems in a pea-winter wheat cropping system on water conservation and use, yields, water use efficiency, and the changes in weed populations. Water storage on land on which wheat stubble was left standing overwinter averaged 10% more than on fall-tilled stubble. There were no significant differences in wheat yields among tillage systems. Weed infestations in peas shifted due to tillage, primarily with lambsquarters. Spring plow was worst. Conservation tillage for a wheat-pea rotation can enhance water conservation, and in dry years can increase pea yields by 20% and wheat yields by 5%. Long-term effects are not consistent due to crop residue influences.
10844. Tanaka, D.. 1989. Spring wheat plant parameters as affected by fallow methods in the northern Great Plains.. Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. J. 53:1506-1511.
Chem fallow was compared to stubble mulch and reduced tillage in a spring wheat-fallow rotation. Average surface residue prior to planting was three and two times greater than reduced tillage for chem fallow and stubble mulch, respectively. Chem fallow plots stored more soil water, but this did not increase yield during the study. During years of crop stress resulting from limited soil water, chem fallow may produce higher yields than stubble mulch. Grain water use efficiency was greater for wheat grown on stubble mulch plots than on chem fallow plots.