Pro's and con's of reduced tillage in maize with respect

to weedsRommie van der Weide

Hilfred Huiting, Piet Bleeker en Marleen Riemens

Why reduced tillage? Which reduced tillage

systems? Research and results First conclusions Future

Content

Why reduced tillage?

Economic advantages: Fuel savings (15 till 80%) Less labour (till 60%) Less machinery costs (but first new

investments) Higher supporting power of the soil On term savings in nutrients

Less emission of CO2, N2O, CH4

Extra carbon in the soil up to 0.2 t.ha-1.y-1 C Better drought tolerance (1% o.s. = 150 m3/ha) Better water infiltration and less erosion (>90% by no

till and >60% by non inversion tillage) Better surfacewater quality through less superficial

emission of nutrients and pesticides

Less emission of CO2, N2O, CH4

Extra carbon in the soil up to 0.2 t.ha-1.y-1 C Better drought tolerance (1% o.s. = 150 m3/ha) Better water infiltration and less erosion (>90% by no

till and >60% by non inversion tillage) Better surfacewater quality through less superficial

emission of nutrients and pesticides

Environmental advantages:

Creating More CompetetiveAlternatives and Tecnologies: Sustainable Farming In Brasil

Creating More CompetetiveAlternatives and Tecnologies: Sustainable Farming In BrasilEfficiency: FuelPloughing = 1 lt for 50 kg kernelsNo Till = 1 lt for 96 to 123 kg kernelsNutrition: NPKPloughing = 1 kg for 15 kg kernelsNo Till = 1 kg for 26 kg kernels

Efficiency: FuelPloughing = 1 lt for 50 kg kernelsNo Till = 1 lt for 96 to 123 kg kernelsNutrition: NPKPloughing = 1 kg for 15 kg kernelsNo Till = 1 kg for 26 kg kernels

Loss of organic matter in convencional,but increase with no till Loss of organic matter in convencional,but increase with no till

1967 1976 19970.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%

10.0%12.0%

3.0% 1.8%

4.4%

3.5%2.2%

6.5%

SOM (%) Fazenda FRANK'ANNA

solo arenoso

Which reduced tillage systems?

Ploughing and culture measures Ploughing and seedbed preparation are important

measures with respect to weed control Economic and environmental benefits result in

increased reduced tillage (95 M ha) (New) technical developments thereby serving the

weed control (e.g. ridge till Cloutier, 2007)

In the Netherlands non inversion tillage in some areas If needed loosening the soil

in autumn cultivation in various ways,

often in combination with a powered tool (harrow or cultivator)

Ridge tillage in Canada/USA (permanent ridges)

Ridge tillage

Before and after sowing on permanent ridges and sowing

machine

Physical weed control in case of crop residues

Strip tillage machinery (Dutch Pol/Kuipers)

No till and direct seeding:

Loosening the soil by:• increased soil fauna• rooting (green manure) crops

Soil coverage for:• erosion prevention• weed control• possibilities for precision spraying

Loosening the soil by:• increased soil fauna• rooting (green manure) crops

Soil coverage for:• erosion prevention• weed control• possibilities for precision spraying

Research and results

Objectives

to investigate the usability of ridge till /no till systems as recently developed in the US and Canada for Dutch conditions;

to investigate the interaction of tillage system, weed control method and green manure crops choice;

to investigate the consequences for weed control, crop protection and economical and environmental aspects.

In 2009 start multiple years experiment maïze in Lelystad (EL&I and SPF)Before several years grassland at marine loam soil Start with main treatments (in 3 replicates): Ploughing Ploughing with a caterpillar Non inversion tillage Ridgetill No till Experimental strips with f.e. strip tillage

Sub treatments: 4 different green manure crops and no/weedy in

fallow period Two different weed control methods

Experiment total 180 fields on 2 ha.

Mechanical weed control

Results 2009Object Weed

control

Rel. fresh yield (57.7 t/ha)

Rel. dry yield (18.9 t/ha)

Rel. VEM yield(18.5 t/ha)

% (weed) cover

Ploughing Chem. 100 100 100 6Mech. 104 100 99 20

N.I. tillage Chem. 105 107 106 3Mech. 104 107 105 29

Ridge tillage Chem. 102 106 105 20Mech. 100 103 102 37

No till Chem. 90 88 88 2Mech. 91 90 90 35

Strip till Chem. 100 106 107 Strip till no RR

Mech. 86 87 89 40

Strip till no RR

Mow. 39 43 42 75

N.I. till no RR Mech. 98 99 98 22

Results 2010Object Weed

control

Rel. fresh yield (53.0 t/ha)

Rel. dry yield (17.5 t/ha)

Rel. VEM yield(16.2 t/ha)

% (weed) cover

Ploughing Chem. 100 100 100 0Mech. 96 101 102 2

N.I. tillage Chem. 98 105 106 2Mech. 93 96 95 6

Ridge tillage Chem. 88 95 97 4Mech. 84 95 97 7

No till Chem. 83 92 91 4Mech. 79 89 89 6

Strip till Chem. 87 93 94 9Strip till no RR

Mech. 65 73 78 72

Strip till no RR

Mow. 55 60 66 83

N.I. til no RR Mech. 92 99 101 18

Weed cover % with different green manure crops:Object Treatment Rye

Oilseed rape

No/weedy

grass/clover Hairy vetch

plough chem. 0.3 0.3 0.3 2.3 1.3

mech. 0.3 0.3 2 1.3 2.3

NI tillage chem. 1.7 2 2.3 3.7 7.3

mech. 1.7 2 7 4.6 5

Ridgetill chem. 5.6 2.9 2.6 10.7 5

mech. 3.3 7.6 6 8.3 5.7

No till chem. 2.7 3.7 5.7 6.3 7.4

mech. 2.3 3.3 3.7 5 6

First conclusions

First conclusions Several soil cultivation systems gave comparable

yields in case the green manure was killed with Roundup. No till resulted in yield reduction during the first years.

For organic farming non inversion tillage instead of ploughing is possible. Mechanical equipment should be adapted to green manure residues on the soil surface (e.g. moving harrows). No till and strip till are difficult to manage organic and avoid yield losses.

More weeds left in case of non inversion tillage (2-3 times) instead of ploughing in the second year.

Also green manure crop choice influences weed pressure (less after rye and oilseed rape).

Reduced tillage systems will gain importance in Europe because of economic en environmental contraints.

The different opportunities need to be optimized and compared on a longer time scale, not only concerning yields, weeds and economics but also on the environmental effects.

Precision techniques (for sowing, nutrition and crop protection) can be used for further improvement.

Future:

Thank you for your attention, discussion and (further) support!

© Wageningen UR

Relative VEM with different green manure crops:Object Treatment Rye

Oilseed rape

No/weedy

Grass/clover Hairy vetch

plough chem. 100 109 107 100 116

mech. 107 108 110 112 106

NI tillage chem. 111 114 115 111 116

mech. 97 102 109 96 104

Ridgetill chem. 97 104 110 99 108

mech. 102 104 97 104 108

No till chem. 90 98 103 103 93

mech. 99 89 95 96 93

First calculations energy usage in MJ/ha

Object

Ploughing 630

Non inversion 606

No till 215

CCIn

filt

rati

on

Infilt

rati

on 8080

6060

4040

2020

00

100100

No Till w/ residue

No Till w/ residue

No Till w/o residue

No Till w/o residue

ConventionalTillage

ConventionalTillage

* *

Series1