Agricultural Reviews

  • Chief EditorPradeep K. Sharma

  • Print ISSN 0253-1496

  • Online ISSN 0976-0741

  • NAAS Rating 4.84

Frequency :
Quarterly (March, June, September & December)
Indexing Services :
AGRICOLA, Google Scholar, CrossRef, CAB Abstracting Journals, Chemical Abstracts, Indian Science Abstracts, EBSCO Indexing Services, Index Copernicus
Submit

Agricultural Reviews, volume 30 issue 1 (march 2009) : 56 - 63

CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE VS CONSERVATION TILLAGE - A REVIEW

S. Subbulakshmi, N. Saravanan, P. Subbian
1Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore-641 003

  • Submitted|

  • First Online |

  • doi

Cite article:- Subbulakshmi S., Saravanan N., Subbian P. (2024). CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE VS CONSERVATION TILLAGE - A REVIEW. Agricultural Reviews. 30(1): 56 - 63. doi: .

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
    Reviewed By

    Download Article
    In this Article
      Contact us
      Follow us

      Editorial Board

      View all (0)