Study

Influence of tillage practices and nutrient management on crack parameters in a Vertisol of central India

  • Published source details Bandyopadhyay K.K, Mohanty M, Painuli D.K, Misra A.K, Hati K.M, Mandal K.G, Ghosh P.K, Chaudhary R.S & Acharya C.L (2003) Influence of tillage practices and nutrient management on crack parameters in a Vertisol of central India. Soil and Tillage Research, 71, 133-142

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Amend the soil using a mix of organic and inorganic amendments

Action Link
Soil Fertility

Control traffic and traffic timing

Action Link
Soil Fertility

Change tillage practices

Action Link
Soil Fertility
  1. Amend the soil using a mix of organic and inorganic amendments

    A controlled, replicated experiment in 2000 on a non-chalky clay soil in Bhopal, India (Bandyopadhyay et al. 2003) found that application of farmyard manure plus inorganic fertilizers reduced the volume of cracks in a soybean Glycine max-linseed Linum usitatissimum rotation (63 m3 of cracks) compared to inorganic fertilizers alone (113 m3), or no fertilizers (161.8 m3). The crop was managed under conventional tillage or sub-soiling (deep tillage). Within each tillage treatment were plots of 8 x 5 m in which no fertilizer, inorganic fertilizer, or inorganic fertilizer plus farmyard manure was applied. There were three replicates per treatment. Crack length, depth and width, and the soil water content and density were measured.

     

  2. Control traffic and traffic timing

    A controlled, replicated experiment in 2000 on a non-chalky clay soil in Bhopal, India (Bandyopadhyay et al. 2003) found that increased compaction increased soil crack width. The smallest cracks were found in uncompacted plots (0.027 m) compared to low (0.037 m) or high compaction plots (0.040 m). Within a rotation of rice Oryza sativa and wheat Triticum aestivum there were three compaction or puddling treatments:  low (four passes by power tiller), high (eight passes by power tiller) and no compaction. There were three replicates in plots of 5 x 8 m. Crack length, depth and width, and soil water content and soil density were measured.

     

  3. Change tillage practices

    A replicated controlled experiment in 2000 on a non-chalky clay soil in Bhopal, India (Bandyopadhyay et al. 2003) found that sub-soiling in a soybean Glycine max - linseed Linum usitatissimum system reduced the size of soil cracks (12.5% in width, 10% depth, 5% length and 12% surface area) compared to conventional tillage. In a soybean-wheat Triticum aestivum rotation the smallest cracks were in mouldboard (0.014 m) compared with reduced (0.025 m) and no tillage plots (0.022 m). There were two experiments: (1) soybean /wheat rotation, with no-, reduced, mouldboard (wheat residue incorporated), and conventional tillage (wheat residue removed). There were three replications on 45 x 16 m plots, inorganic fertilizers were applied; (2) soybean/linseed rotation. This was under conventional tillage or sub-soiling (deep tillage). There were three replications 8 x 5 m, and three fertilizer treatments: no fertilizer, inorganic fertilizer, inorganic fertilizer plus farm yard manure. Crack length, depth and width, and the soil water content and density were measured.

     

Output references

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, terrestrial mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 17

Go to the CE Journal

Subscribe to our newsletter

Please add your details if you are interested in receiving updates from the Conservation Evidence team about new papers, synopses and opportunities.

Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust