Abstract
Abstract. In recent years, many Arkansas cotton producers have adopted conservation tillage, often including winter cover crops, to improve soil quality and prevent erosion. However, no-till and reduced tillage systems do not allow the frequent tillage that has historically been used to help alleviate deep soil compaction problems in this region. To better understand the effect of tillage system on soil compaction, a three-year experiment was conducted in eastern Arkansas to compare effects of the following three tillage systems on soil strength: conventional tillage, no-till, and reduced tillage with a cover crop. A soil probe was used annually after cotton harvest to obtain a full set of cone index (CI) and electrical conductivity (EC) data at five locations across the row, with six replications of each plot x row position combination. Soil moisture for each treatment was determined from soil cores collected at two depths. First-year CI values indicated possible root-limiting conditions below the 30-cm depth in all treatments, but were greater in no-till and cover crop treatments than in conventional-tillage plots. However, tillage treatment showed very little effect on CI in the second year, and no-till treatments had the lowest overall CI values in the third year, regardless of row position, indicating the no-till system gradually decreased compaction in the soil profile at 20-cm depths and below. Although relatively high CI values were still detected from the surface down to a 20-cm depth in all treatments, cotton lint yields did not indicate that soil compaction caused any severe restriction on cotton root growth. Furthermore, these high CI values were shallow enough in the no-till system that in-row chiseling or strip-till that does not disturb more than 30% of the soil surface may be a viable option for decreasing soil compaction if it begins to limit crop production in these systems.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
In the first year, cone index was greater in no-till and cover crop treatments than in conventional-tillage plots.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- no-till and cover crop treatmentse1
- Outcome
- CI valuese1
- Direction
- greatere1
- Qualifier
- First-yeare1
- Comparator
- conventional-tillage plotse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e1“First-year CI values indicated possible root-limiting conditions below the 30-cm depth in all treatments, but were greater in no-till and cover crop treatments than in conventional-tillage plots”
Claim · model-written summary
In the first year, possible root-limiting conditions occurred below the 30-cm depth in all treatments.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- root-limiting conditionse1
- Qualifier
- below the 30-cm depth in all treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e1“First-year CI values indicated possible root-limiting conditions below the 30-cm depth in all treatments, but were greater in no-till and cover crop treatments than in conventional-tillage plots”
Claim · model-written summary
In the second year, tillage treatment had very little effect on cone index.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- tillage treatmente2
- Outcome
- CIe2
- Qualifier
- very little effecte2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e2“tillage treatment showed very little effect on CI in the second year”
Claim · model-written summary
In the third year, no-till treatments had the lowest overall cone index regardless of row position.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- no-till treatmentse3
- Outcome
- overall CI valuese3
- Direction
- loweste3
- Qualifier
- regardless of row positione3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e3“no-till treatments had the lowest overall CI values in the third year, regardless of row position”
Claim · model-written summary
The no-till system gradually decreased compaction in the soil profile at 20-cm depths and below.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- no-till systeme4
- Outcome
- compaction in the soil profilee4
- Direction
- decreasede4
- Qualifier
- at 20-cm depths and belowe4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e4“indicating the no-till system gradually decreased compaction in the soil profile at 20-cm depths and below”
Claim · model-written summary
Relatively high cone index values were detected from the surface down to a 20-cm depth in all treatments.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- CI valuese5
- Qualifier
- from the surface down to a 20-cm depth in all treatmentse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e5“Although relatively high CI values were still detected from the surface down to a 20-cm depth in all treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton lint yields did not indicate that soil compaction severely restricted cotton root growth.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- cotton lint yieldse6
- Qualifier
- did not indicate that soil compaction caused any severe restriction on cotton root growthe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e6“cotton lint yields did not indicate that soil compaction caused any severe restriction on cotton root growth”
Claim · model-written summary
In-row chiseling or strip-till that disturbs no more than 30% of the soil surface may be a viable option for decreasing soil compaction if it begins to limit production.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- in-row chiseling or strip-till that does not disturb more than 30% of the soil surfacee7
- Outcome
- decreasing soil compactione7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Arkansas Cotton Production Systems”
e7“in-row chiseling or strip-till that does not disturb more than 30% of the soil surface may be a viable option for decreasing soil compaction if it begins to limit crop production in these systems”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · physiology: gas exchange · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 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.