Paper · 2012 · Journal of Tropical Soils

Variability of Soybean [Glycine max (L) Merr] Growth in Relation to Chemical Properties of Ultisol from East Lampung

Abdullah Taufiq; Andy Wijanarko

15
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The impact of agricultural intensification on soil degradation now is occurring in tropical countries. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of long-term tillage and N fertilization on soil properties and crop yields in corn-soybean rotation. This long-term study which initiated since 1987 was carried out on a Typic Fragiudult soil at Politeknik Negeri Lampung, Sumatra (105o13’45.5"-105o13’48.0"E, 05o21’19.6"-05o21’19.7"S) in 2010 and 2011. A factorial experiment was arranged in a randomized block design with four replications. The first factor was tillage system namely intensive tillage (IT) and conservation tillage (CT) which consist of minimum tillage (MT) and no-tillage (NT); while the second factor was N fertilization with rates of 0, 100 and 200 kg N ha-1 applied for corn, and 0, 25, and 50 kg N ha-1 for soybean. The results showed that bulk density and soil strength at upper layer after 24 years of cropping were similar among treatments, but the soil strength under IT at 50-60 cm depth was 28.2% higher (p<0.05) than NT. Soil moisture and temperature under CT at 0-5 cm depth were respectively 38.1% and 4.5% higher (p<0.05) than IT. High N rate decreased soil pH at 0-20 cm depth as much as 10%, but increased total soil N at 0-5 cm depth as much as 19% (p<0.05). At 0-10 cm depth, MT with no N had highest exchangeable K, while IT with medium N rate had the lowest (p<0.05). At 0-5 cm depth, MT with no N had highest exchangeable Ca, but it had the lowest (p<0.05) if combined with higher N rate. Microbial biomass C throughout the growing season for NT was consistently highest and it was 14.4% higher (p<0.05) than IT. Compared to IT, Ap horizon of CT after 24 years of cropping was deeper, with larger soil structure and more abundance macro pores. Soybean and corn yields for long-term CT were 64.3% and 31.8% higher (p<0.05) than IT, respectively. Corn yield for long-term N with rate of 100 kg N ha-1 was 36.4% higher (p<0.05) than with no N. Keywords: Conservation tillage, crop yields, N fertilization, soil properties Normal 0 false false false IN X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;} [ How to Cite : Utomo M, IS Banuwa, H Buchari, Y Anggraini and Berthiria . 2013. Long-term Tillage and Nitrogen Fertilization Effects on Soil Properties and Crop Yields . J Trop Soils 18 (2) : 131-139 . Doi: 10.5400/jts.2013.18. 2 . 131] [ Permalink/DOI: www.dx.doi.org/ 10.5400/jts.2013.18. 2 . 131 ] REFERENCES Al-Kaisi and X Yin. 2005. Tillage and crop residue effects on soil carbon dioxide emission in corn- soybean rotation. J Environ Qual 34: 437-445. Pub Med. Barak P, BO Jobe, AR Krueger, LA Peterson and DA Laird. 1997. Effects of long-term soilacidification due to nitrogen inputs in Wisconsin. Plant Soil 197: 61-69. Blake GR and KH Hartge. 1986. Bulk density. In: A Klute (ed). Methods of Soil Analysis. ASA and SSSA. Madison, Wisconsin, USA, pp. 363-375. Blanco-Canqui H and R Lal. 2008. No-till and soil-profile carbon sequestration: an on farm assessment. Soil Sci Soc Am J 72: 693-701. Blanco-Canqui H, LR Stone and PW Stahlman. 2010. Soil response to long-term cropping systems on an Argiustoll in the Central Great Plains. Soil Sci Soc Am J 74: 602-611. Blevins RL, MS Smith, GW Thomas and WW Frye. 1983. Influence of conservation tillage on soil properties. J Soil Water Conserv 38: 301-305. Blevins RL, GW Thomas and PL Cornelius. 1977 Influence of no-tillage and nitrogen fertilization on certain soil properties after 5 years of continuous corn. Agron J 69: 383-386. Blevins, RL and WF Frye, 1993. Conservation tillage: an ecological approach to soil management. Adv Agron 51: 34-77. Brady NC and RR Weil. 2008. The nature and properties of soils. Pearson Prentice Hall. Fourteenth Edition. New Jersey, 965 p. Brito-Vega, H, D Espinosa-Victoria, C Fragoso, D Mendoza, N De la Cruz Landaro and A Aldares-Chavez. 2009. Soil organic particle and presence of earthworm under different tillage systems. J Biol Sci 9: 180-183. Derpch, R 1998. Historical review of no-tilage cultivation of crops. JIRCAS Working Rep. JAPAN Int Res Ctr for Agric Sciences, Ibaraki, Japan 13: 1-18. Diaz-Zorita, M., JH Grove, L Murdock, J Herbeck and E Perfect. 2004. Soil structural disturbance effects on crop yields and soil properties in a no-till production system. Agron J 96: 1651-1659. Dickey EC, PJ Jasa and RD Grisso. 1994. Long-term tillage effect on grain yield and soil properties in a soybean/grain sorghum Rotation. J Prod Agric 7: 465 - 470. Edwards WM, LD, Norton, CE, Redmond. 1988. Characterizing macro pores that affect infiltration into non tilled soil. Soil Sci Soc Am J 52: 483-487. Fernandez RO, PG Fernandez, JVG Cervera and FP Torres. 2007 Soil properties and crop yields after 21 years of direct drilling trials in southern Spain. Soil Till Res 94: 47-54. Fengyun Z, W Pute, Z Xining and C Xuefeng. 2011. The effects of no-tillage practice on soil physical properties. Afr J Biotech 10: 17645-17650. Havlin, JL, JD Beaton, SM Tisdale and WL Nelson. 2005. Soil Fertility and Fertilizer: an Introduction to Nutrient Management. Pearson Prantice Hall. Sevent Edition. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 515 p. Karlen DL, NC Wollenhaupt, DC Erbach, EC Berry, JB Swan, NS Eash and JL Jordahl. 1994. Crop residue effects on soil quality following 10-years of no-till corn. Soil Till Res 31: 149-167. Kumar A and DS Yadav. 2005. Effect of zero and minimum tillage in conjunction with nitrogen management in wheat (Triticum aestivum ) after rice (Oryza sativa.). Indian J Agron 50 (1): 54-57. Lal R. 1989. Conservation tillage for sustainable agriculture: tropics versus temper­ate environment. Adv Agron 42: 85-197. Lal R. 1997. Residue management, conservation tillage and soil restoration for mitigating greenhouse effect by CO2 enrichment. Soil Till Res 43: 81-107. Lal R. 2007. Soil science in a changing climate. CSA New 52: 1-9. Mallory J J, RH Mohtar, GC Heathman, DG Schulze and E Braudeau. 2011. Evaluating the effect of tillage on soil structural properties using the pedostructure concept. Geoderma 163: 141-149. doi:10.1016/ j.geoderma. 2011.01.018. 9p. Paustian K, HP Collins and EA Paul. 1997. Management control on soil carbon. In: EA Paul, ET Elliot, K Paustian and CV Cole (eds). Soil Organic Matter in Temperate Agro-ecosystems: Long-term Experiment in North America. CRC Press, pp. 15-50. Rasmussen, KJ. 1999. Impact of ploughless soil tillage on yield and soil quality: A Scandinavian review. Soil Till Res 53: 3-14. Quintero M. 2009. Effects of conservation tillage in soil carbon sequestration and net revenues of potato-based rotations in the Colombian Andes. [Thesis], University of Florida, USA. SAS [Statistical Analysis System] Institute. 2003. The SAS system for windows. Release 9.1. SASInst Inc, Cary, NC. Singh A and J Kaur. 2012. Impact of conservation tillage on soil properties in rice-wheat cropping system. Agric Sci Res J 2: 30-41. Six, J, SD Frey, RK Thiet and KM Batten. 2006. Bacterial and fungal contributions to carbon sequestration in agroecosystems. Soil Sci Soc Am J 70: 555-569. Smith JL and HP Collins. 2007. Management of organisms and their processes in soils. In: EA Paul (ed). Soil Microbiology, Ecology and Biochemistry. Third Edition. Academic Press, Burlington, USA, 532 p. Stockfisch N, T Forstreuter, W Ehlers. 1999. Ploughing effects on soil organic matter after twenty years of conservation tillage in Lower Saxony, Germany. Soil Till Res 52: 91-101. Tarkalson, DD, GW Hergertb and KG Cassmanc. 2006. Long-term effects of tillage on soil chemical properties and grain yields of a dryland winter wheat-sorghum/corn-fallow rotation in the great plains. Agron J 26: 26-33. Thomas GA, RC Dalal, J Standley. 2007. No-till effect on organic matter, pH, cation exchange capacity and nutrient distribution in a Luvisol in the semi-arid subtropics. Soil Till Res 94: 295-304. Utomo M, H Suprapto and Sunyoto. 1989. Influence of tillage and nitrogen fertilization on soil nitrogen, decomposition of alang-alang (Imperata cylindrica) and corn production of alang-alang land. In: J van der Heide (ed.). Nutrient management for food crop production in tropical farming systems. Institute for Soil Fertility (IB), pp. 367-373. Utomo M. 2004. Olah tanah konservasi untuk budidaya jagung berkelanjutan. Prosiding Seminar Nasional IX Budidaya Pertanian Olah Tanah Konservasi. Gorontalo, 6-7 Oktober, 2004, pp. 18-35 (in Indonesian). Utomo M, A Niswati, Dermiyati, M R Wati, AF Raguan and S Syarif. 2010. Earthworm and soil carbon sequestration after twenty one years of continuous no-tillage corn-legume rotation in Indonesia. JIFS 7: 51-58. Utomo M, H Buchari, IS Banuwa, LK Fernando and R Saleh. 2012. Carbon storage and carbon dioxide emission as influenced by long-term conservation tillage and nitrogen fertilization in corn-soybean rotation. J Trop Soil 17: 75-84. Wang W, RC Dalal and PW Moody. 2001. Evaluation of the microwave irradiation method for measuring soil microbial biomass. Soil Sci Soc Am J 65: 1696-1703. Wright AL and FM Hons. 2004. Soil aggregation and carbon and nitrogen storage under soybean cropping sequences. Soil Sci Soc Am J 68: 507-513. Zibilske LM, JM Bradford and JR Smart. 2002. Conservation tillage induced change in organic carbon, total nitrogen and available phosphorus in a semi-arid alkaline subtropical soil. Soil Till Res 66: 153-163.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 15

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bulk density and soil strength in the upper layer were similar among the tillage and N treatments after 24 years.

Treatment
long-term tillage and N fertilizatione0
Outcome
bulk density and soil strength at upper layere1
Direction
similare1
Comparator
among treatmentse1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“The objective of this study was to determine the effect of long-term tillage and N fertilization on soil properties and crop yields in corn-soybean rotation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 103–259 · show in text ↑
e1

“The results showed that bulk density and soil strength at upper layer after 24 years of cropping were similar among treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 849–975 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil strength at 50-60 cm depth was 28.2% higher under intensive tillage than under no-tillage.

Treatment
ITe2
Outcome
soil strengthe2
Direction
highere2
Value
28.2%e2
Qualifier
50-60 cm depthe2
Comparator
NTe2

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e2

“but the soil strength under IT at 50-60 cm depth was 28.2% higher (p<0.05) than NT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 977–1059 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil moisture at 0-5 cm depth was 38.1% higher under conservation tillage than under intensive tillage.

Treatment
CTe3
Outcome
Soil moisturee3
Direction
highere3
Value
38.1%e3
Qualifier
0-5 cm depthe3
Comparator
ITe3

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e3

“Soil moisture and temperature under CT at 0-5 cm depth were respectively 38.1% and 4.5% higher (p<0.05) than IT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1061–1172 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil temperature at 0-5 cm depth was 4.5% higher under conservation tillage than under intensive tillage.

Treatment
CTe3
Outcome
temperaturee3
Direction
highere3
Value
4.5%e3
Qualifier
0-5 cm depthe3
Comparator
ITe3

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e3

“Soil moisture and temperature under CT at 0-5 cm depth were respectively 38.1% and 4.5% higher (p<0.05) than IT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1061–1172 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A high N rate decreased soil pH at 0-20 cm depth by 10%.

Treatment
High N ratee4
Outcome
soil pHe4
Direction
decreasede4
Value
10%e4
Qualifier
0-20 cm depthe4

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e4

“High N rate decreased soil pH at 0-20 cm depth as much as 10%, but increased total soil N at 0-5 cm depth as much as 19% (p<0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1174–1303 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

A high N rate increased total soil N at 0-5 cm depth by 19%.

Treatment
High N ratee4
Outcome
total soil Ne4
Direction
increasede4
Value
19%e4
Qualifier
0-5 cm depthe4

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e4

“High N rate decreased soil pH at 0-20 cm depth as much as 10%, but increased total soil N at 0-5 cm depth as much as 19% (p<0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1174–1303 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 0-10 cm depth, MT with no N had the highest exchangeable K.

Treatment
MT with no Ne5
Outcome
exchangeable Ke5
Direction
higheste5
Qualifier
0-10 cm depthe5
Comparator
IT with medium N ratee5

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e5

“At 0-10 cm depth, MT with no N had highest exchangeable K, while IT with medium N rate had the lowest (p<0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1305–1415 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 0-10 cm depth, intensive tillage with medium N rate had the lowest exchangeable K.

Treatment
IT with medium N ratee5
Outcome
exchangeable Ke5
Direction
loweste5
Qualifier
0-10 cm depthe5
Comparator
MT with no Ne5

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e5

“At 0-10 cm depth, MT with no N had highest exchangeable K, while IT with medium N rate had the lowest (p<0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1305–1415 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 0-5 cm depth, MT with no N had the highest exchangeable Ca.

Treatment
MT with no Ne6
Outcome
exchangeable Cae6
Direction
higheste6
Qualifier
0-5 cm depthe6

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e6

“At 0-5 cm depth, MT with no N had highest exchangeable Ca, but it had the lowest (p<0.05) if combined with higher N rate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1417–1537 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Exchangeable Ca at 0-5 cm depth was lowest when a higher N rate was combined with MT.

Treatment
higher N ratee6
Outcome
exchangeable Cae6
Direction
loweste6
Qualifier
0-5 cm depthe6

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e6

“At 0-5 cm depth, MT with no N had highest exchangeable Ca, but it had the lowest (p<0.05) if combined with higher N rate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1417–1537 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Microbial biomass C under no-tillage was 14.4% higher than under intensive tillage throughout the growing season.

Treatment
NTe7
Outcome
Microbial biomass Ce7
Direction
highere7
Value
14.4%e7
Qualifier
throughout the growing seasone7
Comparator
ITe7

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e7

“Microbial biomass C throughout the growing season for NT was consistently highest and it was 14.4% higher (p<0.05) than IT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1539–1661 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under conservation tillage the Ap horizon was deeper, with larger soil structure and more macro pores, than under intensive tillage.

Treatment
CTe1
Outcome
Ap horizone1
Direction
deepere1
Qualifier
with larger soil structure and more abundance macro porese1
Comparator
ITe1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e1

“Compared to IT, Ap horizon of CT after 24 years of cropping was deeper, with larger soil structure and more abundance macro pores”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1663–1792 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soybean yield under long-term conservation tillage was 64.3% higher than under intensive tillage.

Taxon
SoybeanGlycine maxe1
Treatment
long-term CTe1
Outcome
yieldse1
Direction
highere1
Value
64.3%e1
Comparator
ITe1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Soybean and corn yields for long-term CT were 64.3% and 31.8% higher (p<0.05) than IT, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1794–1893 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Corn yield under long-term conservation tillage was 31.8% higher than under intensive tillage.

Treatment
long-term CTe1
Outcome
yieldse1
Direction
highere1
Value
31.8%e1
Comparator
ITe1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Soybean and corn yields for long-term CT were 64.3% and 31.8% higher (p<0.05) than IT, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1794–1893 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Corn yield with 100 kg N ha-1 under long-term N fertilization was 36.4% higher than with no N.

Treatment
long-term N with rate of 100 kg N ha-1e1
Outcome
yielde1
Direction
highere1
Value
36.4%e1
Comparator
with no Ne1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Corn yield for long-term N with rate of 100 kg N ha-1 was 36.4% higher (p<0.05) than with no N”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1895–1989 · show in text ↑

tillage · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results

390 papers: 264 positive, 126 negative or no effect

263 papers in the same direction as this paper · 100 in the opposite direction · 26 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

386 papers more in this group

See all 390 papers →

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

1,095 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 papers →

nitrogen · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

2,185 papers: 1,906 positive, 279 negative or no effect

1,905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 234 in the opposite direction · 45 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

2,181 papers more in this group

See all 2,185 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.