No-tillage (NT) farming is superior to intensive tillage for conserving soil and water, yet its potential for sequestering soil organic carbon (SOC) in all environments as well as its impacts on soil profile SOC distribution are not well understood. Thus, we assessed the impacts of long-term NT-based cropping systems on SOC sequestration for the whole soil profile (0-60-cm soil depth) across 11 Major Land Resource Areas (MLRAs: 121, 122, and 125 in Kentucky; 99, 124, 139A in Ohio; and 139B, 139C, 140, 147, and 148 in Pennsylvania) in the eastern United States. Soil was sampled in paired NT and plow tillage (PT) based cropping systems and an adjacent woodlot (WL). No-tillage farming impacts on SOC and N were soil specific. The SOC and N concentrations in NT soils were greater than those in PT soils in 5 out of 11 MLRAs (121, 122, 124, 139A, and 148), but only within the 0- to 10-cm depth. Below 10 cm, NT soils had lower SOC than PT soils in MLRA 124. The total SOC with NT for the whole soil profile (0-60 cm) did not differ from that with PT (P > 0.10) in accord with several previous studies. In fact, total soil profile SOC in PT soils was 50% higher in MLRA 125, 21% in MLRA 99, and 41% in MLRA 124 compared with that in NT soils. Overall, this study shows that NT farming increases SOC concentrations in the upper layers of some soils, but it does not store SOC more than PT soils for the whole soil profile.

No-tillage and soil-profile carbon sequestration : An on-farm assessment

Preface Foreword 1 SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION 1.1. Why Conserve Soil? 1.2. Agents that Degrade Soil 1.3. Soil Erosion 1.4. History of Soil Erosion 1.5. Consequences of Soil Erosion 1.6. Drivers of Soil Erosion 1.7. Erosion in the USA 1.8. Global Distribution of Soil Erosion 1.9. Current Trends in Soil and Water Conservation Summary Study Questions References 2 WATER EROSION 2.2. Types 2.3. Processes 2.4. Factors 2.5. Agents 2.6. Rainfall Erosivity 2.7. Runoff Erosivity 2.8. Soil Properties Affecting Erodibility 2.9. Measuring Erosion Summary Study Questions References 3 WIND EROSION 3.1. Processes 3.2. Factors 3.3. Wind Erosivity 3.4. Soil Erodibility 3.5. Measuring Wind Erosion 3.6. Management of Wind Erosion 3.7. Windbreaks 3.8. Crop Residues 3.9. Perennial Grasses 3.10. Conservation Tillage Summary Study Questions References 4 MODELING WATER AND WIND EROSION 4.1. Modeling Erosion 4.2. Empirical Models 4.3. Universal Soil Loss Equation (USLE) 4.4. Modified USLE (MUSLE) 4.5. Revised USLE (RUSLE): 4.6. Process-Based Models 4.7. Water Erosion Prediction Project (WEPP) 4.8. Ephemeral Gully Erosion Model (EGEM) 4.9. Other Water Erosion Models 4.10. Modeling Wind Erosion 4.11. Wind Erosion Equation (WEQ) 4.12. Revised WEQ (RWEQ) 4.13. Process-Based Models 4.14. Wind Erosion Prediction System (WEPS) 4.15. Other Wind Erosion Models 4.16. Limitations of Water and Wind Models Summary Study Questions References 5 TILLAGE EROSION 5.1. Definition and Magnitude of the Problem 5.2. Tillage Erosion Research: Past and Present 5.3. Tillage Erosion versus Water and Wind Erosion 5.4. Factors Affecting Tillage Erosion 5.5. Landform Erodibility 5.6. Soil Erodibility 5.7. Tillage Erosivity 5.8. Tillage Erosion and Soil Properties 5.9. Indicators of Tillage Erosion 5.10. Measurement of Soil Displacement 5.11. Tillage Erosion and Crop Production 5.12. Management of Tillage Erosion 5.13. Tillage Erosion Modeling 5.14. Predictive Equations 5.15. Computer Models 5.16. Soil Erosion and Crop Harvesting Summary Study Questions References 6 BIOLOGICAL MEASURES OF EROSION CONTROL 6.1. Functions of Canopy Cover 6.2. Soil Amendments 6.3. Cover Crops 6.4. Crop Residues 6.5. Residue Harvesting for Biofuel Production 6.6. Bioenergy Plantations as an Alternative to Crop Residue Removal 6.7. Manuring 6.8. Soil Conditioners: Polymers 6.9. Polyacrylamides Summary Study Questions References 7 CROPPING SYSTEMS 7.1. Fallow Systems 7.2. Summer Fallows 7.3. Monoculture 7.4. Crop Rotations 7.5. Cover Crops 7.6. Cropping Intensity 7.7. Row Crops 7.8. Multiple Cropping 7.9. Double Cropping 7.10. Relay Cropping 7.11. Intercropping 7.12. Contour Farming 7.13. Strip Cropping 7. 14. Contour Strip Cropping 7.15. Land Equivalent Ratio 7.16. Organic Farming Summary Study Questions References 8 NO-TILL FARMING 8.1. Seedbed and Soil Tilth 8.2. Factors Affecting Soil Tilth 8.3. Tilth Index 8.4. Tillage 8.5. Tillage Tools 8.6. Types of Tillage Systems 8.7. Conventional Tillage: Moldboard Plowing 8.8. Conservation Tillage Systems 8.9. No-Till Farming 8.10. Benefits of No-Till Farming 8.11. Challenges in No-Till Management 8.12. No-Till and Subsoiling 8.13. Reduced Tillage 8.14. Mulch Tillage 8.15. Strip Tillage 8.16. Ridge Tillage Summary Study Questions References 9 BUFFER STRIPS 9.1. Importance 9.2. Mechanisms of Pollutant Removal 9.3. Factors Influencing the Performance of Buffer Strips 9.4. Types and Management 9.5. Riparian Buffer Strips 9.6. Filters Strips 9.7. Grass Barriers 9.8. Grass Waterways 9.9. Field Borders 9.10. Modeling of Sediment Transport through Buffer Strips Summary Study Questions References 10 AGROFORESTRY 10.1. Importance 10.2. Classification 10.3. History 10.4. Current Trends 10.5. Functions of Agroforestry 10.6. Agroforestry and Factors of Soil Erosion 10.7. Agroforestry and Land Rec

Principles of Soil Conservation and Management

Crop residue management and soil health: A systems analysis

Summary Soil organic matter (SOM) can be a source or sink for atmospheric CO2 depending on land use, and management of soil, vegetation and water resources. SOM is a source of atmospheric CO2 ,w ith the use of extractive farming practices that lead to a negative nutrient balance and exacerbate soil degradation. The historic loss of C from the SOM pool between the 1850s and 2000 is estimated at 78 � 12 Gt compared with the emission of 270 � 30 Gt from fossil fuel combustion. Despite its numerous direct and ancillary benefits, enhancing the SOM pool is a major challenge, especially in impoverished and depleted soils in harsh tropical climates. In addition to biophysical factors, there are also numerous social, economic and political constraints that limit increase in SOM pools. Conversion of plough-tillage to no-till farming, an important practice to enhance the SOM pool, is constrained by the limited access to herbicides and seed drill, and the competing uses of crop residues. Yet, enhancing the SOM pool is essential to restoring degraded soils, advancing food security and improving the environment. Important subjects among researchable topics include: assessing the rate of SOM accretion for a wide range of land use and management practices with reference to a baseline; evaluating the importance of biochar; measuring and predicting SOM at landscape and extrapolation to regional scale; establishing relationships between SOM and soil quality and agronomic productivity; determining on- and off-site effects of crop residues removal for ethanol/biofuel production; determining the fate of C in SOM translocated by erosional processes; evaluating nutrient requirements for increasing SOM in croplands; validating predictive models in tropical environments; and developing methodology for trading C credits.

http://www.tinread.usarb.md:8888/tinread/fulltext/lal/challenges.pdf

Challenges and opportunities in soil organic matter research

Application of crop residues to soil and reduced or no tillage are current management practices in order to achieve better water management, increase soil fertility, crop production and soil erosion control. This study was carried out to quantify the effect of wheat straw mulching in a no tilled Fluvisol under semi-arid conditions in SW Spain and to determine the optimum rate in terms of cost and soil protection. After a 3-years experiment, mulching application significantly improved physical and chemical properties of the studied soil with respect to control, and the intensity of changes was related to mulching rate. The organic matter content was generally increased, although no benefit was found beyond 10 Mg ha−1 year−1. Bulk density, porosity and aggregate stability were also improved with increasing mulching rates, which confirmed the interactions of these properties. Low mulching rates did not have a significant effect on water properties with respect to control, although the available water capacity increased greatly under high mulching rates. After simulated rainfall experiments (65 mm h−1 intensity), it was found that the mulch layer contributed to increase the roughness and the interception of raindrops, delaying runoff generation and enhancing the infiltration of rain water during storms. Mulching contributed to a reduction in runoff generation and soil losses compared to bare soil, and negligible runoff flow or sediment yield were determined under just 5 Mg ha−1 year−1 mulching rate. It was observed that during simulations, the erosive response quickly decreases with time after prolonged storms (30 min) due to the exhaustion of available erodible particles. These results suggest that the erosive consequences of intermediate intensity 5-years-recurrent storms in the studied area could be strongly diminished by using just 5 Mg ha−1 year−1 mulching rates.

Effects of mulching on soil physical properties and runoff under semi-arid conditions in southern Spain

Land use, soil management, and cropping systems affect stock, distribution, and residence time of soil organic carbon (SOC). Therefore, SOC stock and its depth distribution and association with primary and secondary particles were assessed in long-term experiments at the North Appalachian Experimental Watersheds near Coshocton, Ohio, through *13C techniques. These measurements were made for five land use and soil management treatments: (1) secondary forest, (2) meadow converted from no-till (NT) corn since 1988, (3) continuous NT corn since 1970, (4) continuous NT corn-soybean in rotation with ryegrass since 1984, and (5) conventional plow till (PT) corn since 1984. Soil samples to 70-cm depth were obtained in 2002 in all treatments. Significant differences in soil properties were observed among land use treatments for 0 to 5-cm depth. The SOC concentration (g C kg*1 of soil) in the 0 to 5-cm layer was 44.0 in forest, 24.0 in meadow, 26.1 in NT corn, 19.5 in NT corn-soybean, and 11.1 i n PT corn. The fraction of total C in corn residue converted to SOC was 11.9% for NT corn, 10.6% for NT corn-soybean, and 8.3% for PT corn. The proportion of SOC derived from corn residue was 96% for NT corn inmore » the 0 to 5-cm layer, and it decreased gradually with depth and was 50% in PT corn. The mean SOC sequestration rate on conversion from PT to NT was 280 kg C ha*1 y*1. The SOC concentration decreased with reduction in aggregate size, and macro-aggregates contained 15 to 35% more SOC concentration than microaggregates. In comparison with forest, the magnitude of SOC depletion in the 0 to 30-cm layer was 15.5 Mg C/ha (24.0%) in meadow, 12.7 Mg C/ha (19.8%) in NT corn, 17.3 Mg C/ha (26.8%) in NT corn-soybean, and 23.3 Mg C/ha (35.1%) in PT corn. The SOC had a long turnover time when located deeper in the subsoil.« less

Stock and distribution of total and corn-derived soil organic carbon in aggregate and primary particle fractions for different land use and soil management practices

Minimum tillage practices are known for increasing soil organic carbon (SOC). However, not all environmental situations may manifest this potential change. The SOC and N stocks were assessed on a Mollisol in central Ohio in an 8-year-old tillage experiment as well as under two relatively undisturbed land uses; a secondary forest and a pasture on the same soil type. Cropped systems had 51±4 (equiv. mass) Mg ha −1 lower SOC and lower 3.5±0.3 (equiv. mass) Mg ha −1  N in the top 30 cm soil layer than under forest. Being a secondary forest, the loss in SOC and N stocks by cultivation may have been even more than these reported herein. No differences among systems were detected below this depth. The SOC stock in the pasture treatment was 29±3 Mg ha −1 greater in the top 10 cm layer than in cultivated soils, but was similar to those under forest and no-till (NT). Among tillage practices (plow, chisel and NT) only the 0–5 cm soil layer under NT exhibited higher SOC and N concentrations. An analysis of the literature of NT effect on SOC stocks, using meta-analysis, suggested that NT would have an overall positive effect on SOC sequestration rate but with a greater variability of what was previously reported. The average sequestration rate of NT was 330 kg SOC ha −1  year −1 with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 47 to 620 kg SOC ha −1  year −1 . There was no effect of soil texture or crop rotation on the SOC sequestration rate that could explain this variability. The conversion factor for SOC stock changes from plow to NT was equal to 1.04. This suggests that the complex mechanisms and pathways of SOC accrual warrant a cautious approach when generalizing the beneficial changes of NT on SOC stocks.

Soil organic carbon and nitrogen in a Mollisol in central Ohio as affected by tillage and land use

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

P. Puget

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Stock and distribution of total and corn-derived soil organic carbon in aggregate and primary particle fractions for different land use and soil management practices

Soil organic carbon and nitrogen in a Mollisol in central Ohio as affected by tillage and land use