CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE VS CONSERVATION TILLAGE - A REVIEW

Article Id: ARCC2089 | Page : 56 - 63
Citation :- CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE VS CONSERVATION TILLAGE - A REVIEW.Agricultural Reviews.2009.(30):56 - 63
S. Subbulakshmi, N. Saravanan and P. Subbian
Address : Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore-641 003

Abstract

Conservation tillage decreases soil erosion, leaching of fertilizer, pesticides and herbicides
into the ground water. Conservation and conventional tillage greatly affect bulk density and
soil aggregation. Conservation tillage improves activity of earth worm and other soil micro
flora. Some studies showed that soil microbial activity was higher with conventional tillage
due to better aeration. Numerous studies conducted in temperate climate zones showed
that no-tillage resulted in acidification of surface layer when continued for several years
compared to conventional tillage. Conservation tillage increases soil infiltration rate and
reduces soil evaporation there by it increases soil water storage, while other studies stated
that soil crusting at a slower rate on no-till surface than on the tilled reducing the infiltration
rate. Due to higher residue in surface soil in conservation tillage, it will improve soil organic
carbon content, while other work reported a decrease in soil organic matter compared to
ploughed soil down to a depth of 10 cm after 3 years of study. Zero tillage gives smothering
effect to weeds but some studies shows that, higher density of perennial grass weeds in
reduced tillage systems compared to conventional tillage. Several studies have shown that
crops grown under zero tillage have yielded as similar as or better than those grown under
conventional tillage, while some workers revealed conventional tillage increased the yield of
crops and other scientist reported there no yield difference between any tillage system

Keywords

References

  1. Allmaras, R.R. and Nelson, W.W. (1973). Agron. J. 65: 725-730
  2. Anil Kumar Singh. (2006). In: 18th World Congress of Soil Science, July 9-15, 99-100
  3. At well, B.J. (1993). Environ. Exp.Bot., 33: 27-40.
  4. Baeumer, K and Bakermans, W.A.P. (1973). Adv.Agron. 25: 77-123
  5. Barberi, P and Blo Cascio. (2001). Weed Res., 41 : 325-340
  6. Blevins, R.L., et al. (1977). Agron. J. 69, 383-386
  7. Blevins, R.L.,and Frye, W.W. (1993). Adv. Agron, 51, 33-78
  8. Bond J.J. and Willis, W.D. (1969). Soil Sci. Soc.Am.Proc. 33, 445-448
  9. Borges, D.F. et al. (1997). In ‘ Congresso Latino Americano de Ciencia do solo 10. Rio de Janeiro, Anais’. Sociedade
  10. brasileira de cliencia do solo, on CD-Rom
  11. Bornoux et al. (2006). Adv. Agron. 91 : 47-110
  12. Bottenburg, H., et al., (1997).. Biol.Agric.Hortic. 14: 323-342
  13. Bouaziz, A. (1987). These de doctorat, Institute Agro-nomique et Veterenaire Hassan II. Rabat, Morroco.
  14. Brandt, S.A. (1989). Soils and Crops Workshop. The University of Saskatchewan. Saskatoon, SK. 16-17 Feb. 1989, 99. 330-338
  15. Buhler, D.D. (1992). Weed Sci., 40: 241-248
  16. Buhler, D.D. et al. (1994). Weed Sci., 42 : 205-209
  17. Burford, J.R., et al. (1977). Agric. Rec. Coun (G.B.) Letcombe Lab. Annu. Rep. 71-72
  18. Calegari. A. (1995). Circular 80, Londrina, PR, Brazil
  19. Carefoot, J.M., et al. (1990). Can.J. Soil Sci., 70: 203-214
  20. Castro Filho, C. et al.(2002). Soil Till. Res. 65:45-51
  21. Cavalaris, C.K. and Gemtos, T.A. (2002). J. Scientific Res. and Develop, IV :1-23
  22. Chinnusamy, C., et al. (2000). In: Seminar on the Sustainability of Weed Control Options for the New Millennium. Annamalai
  23. Univ. Dept.of Agron, Tamil Nadu. Dec 20-21:.31
  24. Clements, R.D., et al. (1996). Weed Sci., 44: 314-322
  25. Dheer Singh and Tripathi, R.P. (2001). In: First Biennial Conf. in the New Millennium on Eco-Friendly Weed Management
  26. Options for Sustainable Agriculture. Indian Society of Weed Science and Univ. of Agrl. Sciences, Bangalore. May
  27. 23-24:176
  28. Dick, W.A., et al. (1986). Ohil Agric. Res. Dev.Cent., 1181, 1-34
  29. Dinnes, D.L., et al.. (2002). Agron. J. 94: 153-171.
  30. Donovan, J.T. and McAndrew, D.W. (2000). Weed Technol., 14: 726-733.
  31. Doran, J.W. (1980). Soil Sci. Soc.Am.J. 44:765-771
  32. Duglas, J.T., and Goss, M.J. (1982). Soil Tillage Res. 2, 155-175
  33. Ehlers, W. (1979) Int. Inst. Trop. Agric., Ibadan, Nigeria. 33-45.
  34. Ehlers, W., et al. (1983). Soil Tillage Res., 3: 261-275
  35. Frietas P.L. et al. (1999). Pesq. Agropec. Bras, 35: 157-170
  36. Frye, W.W.(1984). Van Nostrand Reinhold. New York. 127-151.
  37. Frye, W.W., et al.(1985). Am.Soc. Agron., Madison, WI, 335-356.
  38. Gangwar, K.S., et al. (2004). J.Agric. Sci, 142: 453-459.
  39. Gregory, P.J. (1994). In: Physiology and Determination of Crop Yield. (Boote, K.J. et al eds) Madison, WI.: 65-93.
  40. Halvorson, A.D., et al. (2001). Agron. J. 93: 836-844
  41. Hamblin,A.P. 1985. Adv.Agron.38: 95-158
  42. Hill, R.L. and Cruse, R.M. (1985). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 49, 1270-1273
  43. Hopp, H., and Slater, C.S. 1961. The Soil and Health Foundation, Emmaus, Pa. 67-83
  44. John Anurag, P and Singh, R.K. 2007. Allahabad Farmer, LXII(2): 47-52
  45. Kaminski.J. et al.(2000). Ci.Rural 30, 605-609
  46. Vol. 30, No. 1, 2009 63
  47. Kandasamy, O.S. and Krishnakumar, L. (1997). Acta agronomica Hungarica, 45 (1): 63-67
  48. Lal, R. (1976). Soil Sci. Soc, Am. J. 40, 762-768
  49. Lal. R., et al. (1989). Soil Tillage Res, 14, 34-58
  50. Lal.R. (1985). Soil Tillage Res, 6, 149-161
  51. Lampurlanes, J and Cantero-Martinez, C. (2003). Agron.J., 95: 526-536
  52. Lampurlanes, J., et al. (2001). Field Crops Res., 69: 27-40
  53. Lang, P.M., and Mallett, J.B. (1984). South African J.Plant and Soil. 1, 97-98
  54. Lindstrom, M. J., et al. (1984). J. Soil and Water Cons., 39(1): 64-68
  55. Machado, P.L.o.A. and Gerzabek, M.H. (1993). Soil Till. Res. 26: 227-236
  56. Machado, P.L.O.A. and Silva. C. (2001). Znut.Cycl. Agro ecosys. 61: 119-130
  57. Mahli, S.S and Nyborg, M. (1990). Soil Tillage Res., 17: 115-124
  58. Mahli, S.S., et al. (1988). Soil Tillage Res., 11:159-166.
  59. Malhi, S.S., et al. (2006) In: 18th World Congress of Soil Sci., July 9-15, 152-159
  60. Mannering, J.V., et al. (1975). Am. Soc. Agric. Eng., St. Joseph, MI, 75-2523.
  61. Martino, D.L. and Shaykewich, C.F. (1994). Can. J. Soil.Sci., 74: 193-200
  62. Mc Garry .D. (2003). In: Producing in Harmony With Nature. II World Congress on Susta Agrl. Proceedings, Iguacu, Brazia,
  63. August:10-15
  64. McAndrew, D.W., et al. (1994). Can.J.Plant Sci., 56(6):713-722
  65. Mielniczuk, J. (2003). Resumo de Palestras. Aldeia Norte Editora Ltd, Ibiruba : 5-14
  66. Moschler, W.W., et al. (1973). Agron. J.65, 781-783
  67. Mulugeta, D. and Stolenberg, D.E. (1997). Weed Sci., 45 (5): 706-715
  68. Ozturn, H. H, Kamil Ekinci and Zeliha B. Barut. 2006. J. Sustainable Agric., 28(3): 25-37
  69. Peachey, R.E., et al. (2004). Weed Tech. 18: 1023-1030
  70. Pearson, G.J., et al. (1991). Field Crop Res., 38: 117-133
  71. Pratibha, G. et al. (1994). Indian Soc. Oil Seeds Res. 297-301
  72. Qin, R., et al. (2004). Agron. J., 96: 1523-1530
  73. Rao, M. et al. (1995). Highlights of Research ANGRAU, Hyderabad, 1967-1994.
  74. Rapp, H.S., et al. (2004). Weed Technol. 18: 953-961
  75. Rice, C.W. et al. (1982). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 46: 1169-1173
  76. Riezebos, H.T.H and Loerto, A.C. (1998). Soil Till. Res. 49: 271-275
  77. Sathyamoorthi, R., et al. (2001). In: First Biennial Conf. in the New Millennium Eco-Friendly Weed Management Options for
  78. Sustainable Agriculture. Bangalore. 23-24.
  79. Scopel, E. and Findeling. A. (2001). In: Proceeding of the First World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, Madrid, 1-5
  80. Oct. 2001.XUL, Cordoba, Spain. 2:85-92
  81. Sharma, P.K., et al. (1988). Agron. J., 80: 34-39
  82. Siridas, N., D. et al. (2001). J.Agron. Crop Sci. 187: 167-176.
  83. Sisti, C.P.J. et al. (2004). Soil Till. Res . 76: 39-58
  84. Smeda, R.J., and Weller, S.C. (1988). Weed Control conf. 43, 12.
  85. Smika, D.E. (1976). Great Plains Agric. Council, Publ. No.77 :79-91.
  86. Statey, T.E., and Fairchild. D.M. (1978). Abstracts of Annual Meeting of Am. Soc. Microbial., Los Angeles.
  87. Subbulakshmi, S. (2007). Ph.D Thesis, Tamil Nadu Agrl. Univ, Coimbatore, India
  88. Tracy, P.W., et al. (1990). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J, 54, 457-461
  89. Tuesca, D., et al. (2001). Weed Res., 41: 369-382
  90. Unger, P.W. (1981). Soil Sci. Soc, Am. J. 45, 941-945
  91. Unger, P.W. and Wiese. A.F. (1979). Soil Sci. Soc, Am. J. 43, 582-588
  92. Unger, P.W., and AcCalla. T.M. (1980). Adv. Agron. 33, 1-58
  93. Uromo, M. (1986). Ph.D. Dissertation Dep. Agron., University of Kentucky, Lexington
  94. Vencill, W.K. and Banks, P.A. (1994). Weed Sci., 42: 541-547
  95. Wiese, A.F. et al. (1979).In: Proc. Crop Prod. and Utiliz. Symp., February 1979, Amarillo, Tex: E-1-6.
  96. Wilhelm, W. W. and Wortmann, C.S . (2004). Agron. J., 96: 425-432
  97. Wulfsohn, D., et al. (1996). Soil Tillage Res., 38: 1-16
  98. Yin, X and M. M. Al-Kaisi. 2004. Agron. J. 96: 723-733

Global Footprints