Study

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Crop production: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Crop production: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland

Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

Action Link
Mediterranean Farmland
  1. Crop production: Use no tillage instead of reduced tillage

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2009 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (4,6)), found similar crop yields in plots with no tillage or reduced tillage. Crop yield: Similar barley yields were found in plots with no tillage, compared to reduced tillage (1,350–4,400 vs 1,050–4,100 kg/ha). Methods: No tillage or reduced tillage was used on nine plots each (50 x 6 m plots). A cultivator was used for reduced tillage (10–15 cm depth, 50% incorporation of crop residues), in October or November. A seed drill and herbicide were used for no tillage. Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha). Mature barley was harvested in June 2006–2009.

     

  2. Crop production: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2009 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (4,12,13,15)), found that tillage had inconsistent effects on the yield of barley straw. Crop yield: More barley straw was found in plots with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in one of six comparisons (511 vs 242 g/m2), but less barley straw was found in one of six comparisons (332 vs 541). In one of three years, the barley crop failed with conventional tillage, but not with no tillage. Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on nine plots each (50 x 6 m plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (25–30 cm depth, 100% incorporation of crop residues). A seed drill and herbicide were used for no tillage. Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha). Mature barley was harvested in June 2006–2009 (three samples/plot, 50 cm of one row/sample).

     

  3. Crop production: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2009 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (3,12,13,17)), found higher crop yields in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Crop yield: Higher barley yields were found in plots with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage (1,792 vs 1,155 kg/ha). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used on nine plots each (50 x 6 m plots) in October or November. A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (25–30 cm depth, 100% incorporation of crop residues). A cultivator was used for reduced tillage (10–15 cm depth, 50% incorporation of crop residues). Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha). Mature barley was harvested in June 2006–2009.

     

  4. Soil: Use no tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2009 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (4,17,23,26)), found that tillage had inconsistent effects on greenhouse-gas emissions from soils. Greenhouse gases: Higher carbon dioxide emissions were found in soils with no tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in three of four comparisons, but lower emissions were found in one of four comparisons (amounts of carbon dioxide not clearly reported). Methods: No tillage or conventional tillage was used on nine plots each (50 x 6 m plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (25–30 cm depth, 100% incorporation of crop residues). A seed drill and herbicide were used for no tillage. Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha). Carbon dioxide was measured with an open chamber (21 cm diameter, 900 mL airflow/minute, 2 samples/plot/day, every 7–14 days, in 2006–2009).

     

  5. Soil: Use reduced tillage in arable fields

    A replicated, randomized, controlled study in 1996–2009 in a rainfed barley field in the Ebro river valley, Spain (same study as (3,20,26,30)), found higher greenhouse-gas emissions in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage. Greenhouse gases: Higher carbon dioxide emissions were found in soils with reduced tillage, compared to conventional tillage, in three of four comparisons (amounts of carbon dioxide not clearly reported). Methods: Reduced tillage or conventional tillage was used on nine plots each (50 x 6 m plots). A mouldboard plough was used for conventional tillage (25–30 cm depth, 100% incorporation of crop residues). A cultivator was used for reduced tillage (10–15 cm depth, 50% incorporation of crop residues). Two-thirds of the plots were fertilized (60 or 120 kg N/ha). Carbon dioxide was measured with an open chamber (21 cm diameter, 900 mL airflow/minute, 2 samples/plot/day, every 7–14 days, in 2006–2009).

     

Output references
What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation assesses the research looking at whether interventions are beneficial or not. It is based on summarised evidence in synopses, on topics such as amphibians, bats, biodiversity in European farmland, and control of freshwater invasive species. More are available and in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
Our Journal: Conservation Evidence

Our Journal:
Conservation Evidence

A unique, free to publish open-access journal publishing research and case studies that measure the effects of conservation actions.

Read latest volume: Volume 16

Special issues: Amphibian special issue

Go to the 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 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