What is the difference between minimum tillage and conventional tillage

Before sowing, the vegetation present has to be destroyed for which broad spectrum, nonselective herbicides with relatively short residual effect Paraquat, Glyphosate etc. Stubble mulch Tillage. Conventional method of tillage results in soil erosion. Stubble mulch tillage or stubble mulch farming a new approach was developed for keeping soil protected at all times whether by growing a crop or by crop residues left on the surface during fallow periods.

It is a year round system of managing plant residue with implements that undercut residue, loosen the soil and kill weeds. Sweeps or blades are generally used to cut the soil up to 12 to 15cm depth in the first operation after harvest and the depth of cut reduced during subsequent operations. When unusually large amount of residues are present, a disc type implement is used for the first operation to incorporate some of the residues into the soil.

This hastens decomposition, but still keeps enough residues on the soil. Two methods are adopted for sowing crops in stubble mulch farming:. Similar to zero tillage, a wide sweep and trash-bars are used to clear a strip and a narrow planter-shoe opens a narrow furrow into which seeds are placed. A narrow chisel of 5 to 10 cm width is worked through the soil at a depth of 15 to 30 cm leaving all plant residues on the surface. The chisel shatters tillage pans and surface crusts. Planting is done through residues with special planters.

Photo Source: www. Tillage :: Modern Concepts of Tillage. Modern concepts of Tillage In conventional tillage, energy is often wasted and sometimes, soil structure is destroyed.

Removing the soil insulating layer increases the rate of soil drying and warming in close proximity to the seed, promoting earlier seed germination compared to soil with residue left intact. We encourage the reuse and dissemination of the material on this site for noncommercial purposes as long as attribution to the original material on the InTeGrate site is retained.

Material on this page is offered under a Creative Commons license unless otherwise noted below. Show terms of use for text on this page ».

Show terms of use for media on this page ». Disclaimer: Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this website are those of the author s and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. Your Account. Learn More. These materials are part of a collection of classroom-tested modules and courses developed by InTeGrate. The materials engage students in understanding the earth system as it intertwines with key societal issues.

The collection is freely available and ready to be adapted by undergraduate educators across a range of courses including: general education or majors courses in Earth-focused disciplines such as geoscience or environmental science, social science, engineering, and other sciences, as well as courses for interdisciplinary programs.

Explore the Collection ». The student materials are available for offline viewing below. Overall, several mechanisms that possibly contribute to an increased OM sequestration were suggested by various studies and are still discussed controversially.

Furthermore, information on MT systems is scarce, since mainly NT systems have been investigated. We hypothesize that physical protection, and not biochemical stabilization, is the main reason for an enhanced preservation of OM in MT systems compared to CT systems, and that surplus OM is mainly located in water-stable microaggregates.

The objectives of our study were to investigate 1 to which extent water-stable macro- and microaggregates sequester OM in an MT system compared to a CT system and 2 if the content of biochemically stabilized OM differs between the two tillage systems, and 3 to study the temporal dynamics of the distribution of aggregate size classes among tillage systems in the field. The mean annual precipitation and temperature are mm and 8.

In , two different tillage treatments were established with four field-replicates for each treatment: conventional tillage CT by mouldboard ploughing to cm depth and MT using a rotary harrow to 5- to 8-cm depth. Before , the field had been mouldboard ploughed. The crops grown from to were winter wheat Triticum aestivum L. All crop residues were incorporated by the respective tillage operations. In , forage maize Zea mays L. The maize stubble was not incorporated, and the fields were bare fallows until the end of March The tillage operations were then carried out, and field bean Vicia faba L.

Harvest took place on the 29th of August. Further site characteristics are given by Ehlers et al. Samples were taken in March after fallow and before the tillage at the end of March and on the 7th of November , 5 MT and 6 CT days after tillage.

From each field replicate, a composite sample out of three subplots was taken from 0- to 5-cm surface soil and to cm subsoil depth. In the following days, fractionation was carried out as described below. Contents of C org and N for the surface soils 0—5 cm and subsoils 10—20 cm are shown in Table 1.

The sampling depths 0 to 5 and 10 to 20 cm were chosen in order to distinguish accurately between those layers that were affected by MT and those that were not. However, one has to keep in mind that the to cm depth was not entirely representative of the plough layer of the CT treatment. At the sampling date of November, an accumulation of the harvest residues was visible in the lower third of the Ap horizon of the CT treatment.

The temporal dynamics of water-stable aggregates was studied by sampling soils in March after fallow, Jacobs et al. We used the method developed by Cambardella and Elliott and modified by Six et al. Thereafter, the sieve was moved up and down into the water with 50 repetitions. Aggregates that passed the 2-mm mesh were poured onto the next smaller mesh size, and the fractionation procedure was continued as described above.

Mesh sizes used were 1 mm for medium macroaggregates, 0. All fractions were ball milled Retsch, Haan, Germany , and C org and N concentrations were determined in all water-stable aggregate size classes obtained and in the bulk soil.

For this site, Jacobs et al. Thus, in this study, C org and N concentrations of the respective aggregate size classes are expressed on a whole soil basis. Operator variability was small to moderate for the five aggregate fractions. For the surface soil of the CT treatment, yields were affected to a moderate extent, but generally within the range of the standard errors. Sawallisch compared to 0. Quendt Fig. For the CT md and MT md treatments, all naturally occurring macroaggregates were gently destroyed by a mortar, and the soil was passed through a 0.

Soil moisture was controlled regularly by weighing and corrected if necessary by adding distilled water. Carbon and N concentrations were determined on all soil samples before day 0 and at the end of incubation day 28 by dry combustion Vario Max, Elementar, Hanau, Germany.

Carbonates were determined by the Scheibler method. Soil microbial C C mic and N N mic were determined after 28 days of incubation by the chloroform—fumigation—extraction method Vance et al. Two portions equivalent to g dry soil were taken from each soil sample. One portion was fumigated for 24 h with ethanol-free CHCl 3 and was extracted with mL 0. A nonfumigated portion was extracted at the same time fumigation commenced. Basal respiration Heinze et al. In order to determine the biochemically stabilized OM pool, the samples taken in November were subjected to acid hydrolysis as described by Plante et al.

Briefly, 0. Thereafter, samples were washed three times with mL distilled H 2 O, the supernatant was discarded after centrifugation at 5, g for 15 min, and the soil was freeze-dried. The remaining, nonhydrolysable, C org and N fractions, which are regarded as biochemically stabilized, recalcitrant soil organic matter SOM pools Paul et al. For the surface soils of the CT and MT systems, we calculated the C mass per unit area in an equivalent soil mass as described by Ellert et al. For the calculations, the depths considered ranged from 0—5 to 0—5.

Means and standard errors were calculated for each parameter detected within each sampling depth and for each treatment. You must choose what suits the existing set or combination of tractors and implements that you have on your farm best. The cost and risk of moving into no-till or minimum with new expensive equipment must be carefully considered. Effect on soils If you want to be inspired to change from your conventional tillage to conservation tillage please visit a farm where no-till or minimum till has been implemented over seven years on dryland, where the rainfall is adequate probably over mm per year , or on high potential centre pivot irrigated land.

Dig into the soils and you will find no soil crusting, earthworms abounding, improved aggregation of soil particles, increased humus content, no compaction, improved soil tilth, retention of moisture and vastly improved fertility with a high build-up of diverse good soil bacteria and mycorrhiza. The soil system thus created can provide the crop planted with nutrients over the whole season and produce highly profitable crops.

The full conventional system produces the opposite effect of every factor mentioned above. Remember it takes many years to achieve the creation of an ideal soil in practice.

Conclusion Carefully consider the factors involved, as outlined above, to be able to make a change, in order to improve your soils and potential income so as to be able to survive as a successful farmer in the coming years.