Agronomy Journal Grow Your Career With ASA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Katsvairo, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Es, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Katsvairo, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Es, H.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Katsvairo, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Es, H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Crop Rotation Systems
Right arrow Hydraulic Conductivity
Right arrow Structure and Properties
Right arrow Soil Biology
Right arrow Other Soil Management
Right arrow Tillage
Agronomy Journal 94:299-304 (2002)
© 2002 American Society of Agronomy

TILLAGE

Tillage and Rotation Effects on Soil Physical Characteristics

Tawainga Katsvairo, William J. Cox* and Harold van Es

Dep. of Crop and Soil Sci., Cornell Univ., Ithaca, NY 14853

* Corresponding author (wjc3{at}cornell.edu)

Received for publication February 15, 2001.

   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
Farmers are adopting different cropping systems, so our objective was to identify tillage x rotation interactions for soil physical characteristics in the sixth year of a tillage (moldboard plow, chisel, and ridge) x rotation {continuous corn (Zea mays L.), soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.]–corn and soybean–wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)/clover (Trifolium pretense L.)–corn} study. Moldboard plow had lower penetration resistance (0.97 MPa) and bulk density (1.19 g cm-3) and greater infiltration (75 µm s-1) and porosity (-2.5 to -40 kPa soil water potential) compared with ridge tillage (1.39 MPa, 1.31 g cm-3, and 24 µm s-1, respectively) at the sixth leaf (V6) stage and greater infiltration (106 and 31 µm s-1, respectively) during early grain fill (R3) of corn. In ridge tillage, the interrow had lower penetration resistance (1.10 Mpa) and bulk density (1.28 g cm-3) and greater infiltration (35 µm s-1) vs. the row (1.68 MPa, 1.34 g cm-3, and 13 µm s-1, respectively) at V6 but greater penetration resistance (3.13 and 2.46 MPa, respectively) at R3. The soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation had the greatest earthworm densities (504 m-2) and infiltration (68 µm s-1) among rotations at V6. Earthworm densities and infiltration explained about 25% of corn yield variability, which may have contributed in part to the 15 to 40% yield advantage for corn in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation in moldboard plow. Tillage x rotation interactions did not exist for soil physical characteristics, so 5-yr tillage effects would be consistent across rotations.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
TILLAGE AND CROP ROTATION are two management inputs that affect soil physical characteristics (Hamblin, 1985). Few studies, however, have evaluated the combined effects of tillage and crop rotation on soil physical characteristics. Farmers have begun to adopt more diverse rotations because the 1996 Federal Agriculture and Improvement Act decouples support payments from production. More information is required on the combined effects of tillage and crop rotation on soil physical characteristics.

Many researchers (Hill, 1990; Logsdon et al., 1990; Vyn and Raimbault, 1993; Cassel et al., 1995) have reported greater bulk density and soil penetration resistance and lesser total porosity in no-till compared with moldboard plow and chisel plow during early and midseason corn growth. Lal et al. (1994), however, reported a tillage x crop rotation interaction with the least bulk density (1.10 g cm-3) and greatest total porosity (58%) in a no-till continuous corn system. Betz et al. (1998) also reported a tillage x row position interaction with no differences in bulk density or soil mechanical resistance among tillage systems in tracked interrows. In fact, Logsdon et al. (1999) concluded that no-till did not result in more dense soil compared with chisel tillage unless traffic was controlled in chisel tillage. Furthermore, observed differences in soil physical properties among tillage systems are usually transient because large pores created by tillage often collapse after rainfall impact and drying cycles (Hamblin, 1985; Ahuja et al., 1998).

Tillage can also affect earthworm densities, which in turn, may affect field infiltration rates (Kladivko et al., 1997). No-till generally has greater earthworm densities compared with moldboard plow and/or chisel tillage (Jordan et al., 1997; Kladviko et al., 1997; Hubbard et al. 1999). Pankhurst et al. (1995), however, reported that the amount of residue and not a particular tillage system affects earthworm densities. Willoughby et al. (1997) reported that earthworm densities were correlated with field infiltration rates immediately after corn planting in a corn-soybean rotation. Trojan and Linden (1998), however, reported that earthworm densities in continuous corn were not correlated with field infiltration rates during the late grain-filling stage.

The objective of this research was to evaluate some soil physical (penetration resistance, bulk density, porosity, and field infiltration rates) and biological (earthworm densities) characteristics at the V6 and R3 growth stages of corn (Ritchie et al., 1993) in the sixth and final year of a tillage x crop rotation study. Specifically, we were most interested in tillage x crop rotation interactions, especially in ridge tillage, because few studies have evaluated soil physical characteristics in ridge tillage under different rotations.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
A 6-yr tillage x rotation x management study was initiated in the fall of 1991 on a subsurface-drained Kendaia-Lima silt loam soil (fine-loamy, mixed, nonacid, mesic Aeric Epiaquept-Oxyaquic Hapludalf) at the Robert B. Musgrave Farm near Aurora, NY (42°45' N, 76°35' W). The 2-ha experimental site had been under chisel tillage since 1988 and had been planted to soybean in 1991.

The experimental design was a randomized complete block in a split-split plot treatment arrangement with four replications. Main plots, 55 m wide by 30 m long, consisted of three tillage systems (chisel, moldboard plow, and ridge). Moldboard and chisel tillage (0.20-m depth) occurred in the fall of 1991 but during the spring in all subsequent years, including 1997 (28 April). Subplots, 6.1 m wide (8 rows of corn) by 30 m long, consisted of three crop rotations (continuous corn, soybean–corn, and soybean–wheat/clover–corn). All phases of each crop were included, so a total of six crops (three corn phases, two soybean phases, and one wheat/clover phase) were planted annually. Sub-subplots, 6.1 m wide by 15 m long, consisted of high and low chemical input management of all three crops in the three rotations. Soil physical and biological measurements were taken only in the corn phase of each rotation in the high management plots in 1997.

‘Pioneer Brand 3525’ hybrid corn was planted on 30 Apr. 1997 at a row spacing of 0.76 m and a planting rate of 72000 kernels ha-1 with a Buffalo Till Planter (Fleisher Manufacturing Co., Columbus, NE). Sweeps were mounted on the planter for a one-pass tillage planting operation in ridge tillage. Sweeps were removed from the planter for moldboard plow and chisel tillage plots, which received a single harrow-cultipacker or disk-cultipacker operation, respectively, the day before planting.

Starter fertilizer was applied in a band at planting in all corn plots at a rate of 28, 56, and 56 kg ha-1 N, P2O5, and K2O, respectively. Corn plots in the high chemical management plots received a broadcast application of 2.5 kg ha-1 a.i. of cyanazine {2-[4-chloro-6-(ethylamino)-S-triazin-2-yl] amino]-2-methlypropanenitrile} and 2.2 kg ha-1 a.i. of metolachlor [2-chloro-N-(2-ethyl-6-methylphenyl)-N-(2-methoxy-1-methylethyl) acetamide] immediately after planting for weed control. Because of weed problems with clover regrowth in corn in both chisel and ridge tillage in 1993, clover in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation under both tillage systems received 0.56 kg ha-1 a.i. of glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine isopropylamine salt] and 1.12 kg ha-1 a.i. of dicamba [3,6-dichloro-o-anisic-acid] in the late fall in all subsequent years. Corn plots under high chemical management also received 1.12 kg ha-1 a.i. of the soil-applied insecticide terbufos {S-[(1,1-dimethylethyl) thio] methyl] 0,0-diethyl phosphorodithoidle} at planting for corn rootworm control. When corn was at the V4 stage (8 June) of development, the high chemical management plots in moldboard plow and chisel tillage received a 0.56 kg ha-1 a.i. application of dicamba for broadleaf weed control. In ridge tillage, the continuos corn and soybean–corn plots received a 1.12 kg ha-1 a.i. application of glyphosate in the fall of 1996 for control of perennial weeds. The ridges were reconstructed in ridge tillage at the V4 stage of development, which provided for additional weed control. At the V5 stage (12 June), corn plots under high chemical management received 135 kg N ha-1, as a 32% (v/v) solution of urea [(NH2)2CO] and ammonium nitrate (NH4NO3), injected 0.1 m deep between the rows.

Percent ground cover was measured in the row and interrow a few days after planting using the beaded string method (Sloneker and Moldenhauer, 1977). Penetrometer measurements were taken with a Bush recording soil penetrometer (Findley, Irvine, Midlothian, Scotland) with a 12.9-mm-diam. cone base in the row and nontracked interrows at depths of 0.075, 0.110, and 0.145 m at the V6 (15 June) and R3 (20 August) stages of corn growth in 1997. The penetrometer values were divided by the area of the cone to convert to cone index values, expressed in pressure units. Gravimetric water content was determined in the row in the upper 0.15-m soil depth at the time of penetrometer measurements.

Field infiltration rates were determined in the row and nontracked interrows at the V6 (15 and 16 June) and R3 (20 and 21 August) stages of corn growth as previously described by van Es et al. (1999). Steel rings, 0.152-m i.d., were placed into the soil centered at a depth of 0.076 m. A portable custom-made rainfall simulator was placed on top of the rings and used to prewet the soil under near-natural conditions (compared with instantaneous ponding) at a rate of 76 mm h-1 for 1800 s or until ponding, depending on which occurred first. A Marriott-type permeameter, which established a 0.10-m hydraulic head, was then placed on the rings. Water loss in the permeameter was recorded for a period of 660 to 840 s after establishment of a constant head. One-dimensional water flow in the infiltration ring, then three-dimensional flow below the ring, was assumed to calculate field infiltration rates as follows (Kachanoski et al., 1989):

where

Undisturbed soil cores were also taken from the field in rings, 0.102-m i.d. and 0.076-m height, from the 0.15-m depth at the V6 and R3 stages of corn growth. The samples were wrapped in polyethene bags and stored in a cold room at 1 to 3°C until laboratory analysis. To determine water retention characteristics, the soil cores were removed from the cold room and exposed to room temperature for a minimum of 2 h. The two ends of the cores were delicately trimmed with a scalpel to level off the cores' ends. Double-layered cheesecloth was attached to the bottom of each core using rubber bands. The soil cores were then transferred to a basin where the water level was raised gradually until saturation over a period of 4 d. The saturated cores were weighed, allowed to drain freely on a drainage table for 4 h, and weighed again. The change in weight in the 75-mm-high core was attributed to 37.4 mm of tension (75 mm of tension at the top of the core and 0 mm at the saturated bottom). The cores were then transferred to pressure cells with a 0.45-µm nylon filter paper, which served as a porous medium for soil water extraction (van Es et al., 1999). Pressures of 1.0, 2.5, 5.0, 10.0, 20.0, and 40.0 kPa were sequentially applied to the cells. The volume of water outflow was measured for each cell at every pressure using graduated cylinders. Equilibration was achieved when water ceased flowing from the cells into the graduated cylinders, usually within 2 to 4 d at each pressure step. Samples were then oven-dried at 105°C. Radii of the different pore classes were estimated from the capillary equation (Marshall et al., 1996). The cumulative volume of water outflow between the saturation point and successive pressure levels was used to determine percentage air-filled porosity for that corresponding pore class. Bulk density was obtained by dividing oven-dried (105°C) soil weight by the soil sample volume.

Sampling for earthworms was done in mid-May, shortly after corn emergence. A cylindrical soil sampler, 15 cm in diameter and height, was used to collect four soil samples each from the row and interrow positions. The soil samples were spread on a table, and earthworms were counted by hand in the field.

All data were analyzed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) or general linear model (GLM) procedures using the SAS Statistical Software Package (SAS Inst., 1991). Field infiltration rates were normalized for variance by transforming the data to the natural logarithm equivalent. Penetrometer measurements had no interaction with depth, so we will only report the measurements at the 0.15-m depth, which corresponds with the measurement depth for bulk density and air-filled porosity. Mean separation for main effects and interactions was obtained by Fisher's protected LSD, as described by Little and Hills (1978). The regression (REG) procedure in SAS was used to determine linear and quadratic relationships between corn yields in 1997 with soil measurements. Effects for all analyses were tested using the {alpha} = 0.05 error level.


   RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 
When averaged across tillage systems and row positions, the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation had the greatest earthworm densities among the three rotations (Table 1). Hubbard et al. (1999) reported greater earthworm densities in a soybean–corn rotation compared with a wheat–corn rotation because the lower C/N ratio in soybean vs. wheat residue provided a more favorable food source to earthworms. In our study, however, we interseeded red clover into standing wheat as a green manure crop. After wheat harvest, red clover produced significant dry matter during the late summer and fall. The red clover residue probably had a low C/N ratio, thus resulting in a more favorable food source and more earthworms in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Earthworm densities in the row and interrow positions of three tillage systems and three rotations in mid-May of 1997 at Aurora, NY.

 
A tillage x row position interaction existed for earthworm densities. Row position did not affect earthworm densities under chisel and moldboard tillage. In contrast, earthworm densities averaged 191 m-2 in the row compared with 515 m-2 in the interrow in ridge tillage. Sweeps were mounted on the planter to remove residue from the seed zone in ridge tillage because residue reduces soil temperature (Swan et al., 1987) and corn emergence in northern latitudes (Cox et al., 1990). The use of sweeps, however, reduced residue in the row to 30 to 40% and increased residue in the interrow to 60 to 80%, depending on the cropping system. Pankhurst et al. (1995) reported that the amount of residue and not tillage influenced earthworm densities in an Australian study. The redistribution of residue from the row to the interrow during the planting operation in late April probably contributed to the difference in earthworm densities between row and interrow positions in ridge tillage in mid-May.

Crop rotation did not affect soil penetration resistance at the 0.15-m soil depth at the V6 and R3 stages of corn growth (data not shown), which is consistent with previous studies (Hammel, 1989; Lal et al., 1994). A tillage x row position interaction existed for soil penetration resistance at the V6 stage because ridge tillage had greater penetration resistance in the row but similar penetration resistance in the interrow compared with moldboard plow or chisel tillage (Table 2). Gravimetric water content in the row did not differ among moldboard plow (0.34 g g-3), chisel (0.34 g g-3), and ridge tillage (0.33 g g-3) systems in the upper 0.15-m soil depth at the V6 stage. Consequently, spring soil loosening in chisel and moldboard plow systems probably resulted in their lower soil penetration resistance in the row during early corn growth compared with ridge tillage. Apparently, ridge reconstruction, which was performed a week before soil penetration measurements, loosened the soil as much as a primary tillage operation, as indicated by similar soil penetration resistance in the interrow among tillage systems.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Soil penetration resistance, expressed as cone index values, and bulk density at the 0.15-m soil depth in the row and interrow positions of three tillage systems at the sixth leaf (V6) and early grain-filling (R3) stages of corn growth at Aurora, NY, in 1997.

 
Primary tillage operations, however, have a transitory effect on soil physical characteristics because of soil settling after wetting and drying cycles (Hamblin, 1985). Three wetting and drying cycles occurred between the V6 and R3 growth stages because of precipitation patterns (Fig. 1) . Gravimetric water content in the row did not differ among moldboard plow (0.26 g g-3), chisel (0.26 g g-3), and ridge tillage (0.25 g g-3) systems in the upper 0.15-m soil depth at the R3 stage. Likewise, soil penetration resistance in the row and interrow positions did not differ among the three tillage systems at the R3 stage (Table 2). Surprisingly, soil penetration resistance averaged more in the interrow vs. the row at the R3 stage. It is not clear why the nontracked interrow had greater soil penetration resistance than the row position at the R3 stage.



View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. Weekly precipitation and growing degree days (30–10°C system) at Aurora, NY, in 1997.

 
Crop rotation did not affect bulk density and did not interact with tillage systems at the 0.15-m soil depth at the V6 and R3 stages of corn growth (data not shown). When averaged across crop rotations and row positions, bulk density averaged more in ridge tillage compared with moldboard plow tillage at the V6 stage (Table 2). Other researchers (Hill, 1990; Vyn and Raimbault, 1993) have reported greater bulk density for no-till compared with moldboard plow tillage during early corn growth. At the R3 stage, however, bulk density did not differ among tillage systems. Bulk density averaged less in the interrow vs. the row at the V6 stage in part because of 0.06 g cm-3 less bulk density in the row in ridge tillage. At the R3 stage, however, bulk density did not differ between row positions.

Field infiltration rates averaged more in chisel and moldboard plow tillage compared with ridge tillage at the V6 stage (Table 3). Again, spring soil loosening in chisel and moldboard plow tillage probably contributed to the two- to threefold difference in infiltration rates among tillage systems at the V6 stage. Moldboard plow, however, continued to have greater infiltration rates compared with ridge tillage at the R3 stage (Table 3). It is not clear why field infiltration averaged more in moldboard plow compared with ridge tillage at the R3 stage when soil penetration resistance and bulk density did not differ between the two tillage systems.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Field infiltration rates in the row and interrow positions under three tillage systems and three rotations at the sixth leaf (V6) and early grain-filling (R3) stages of corn growth at Aurora, NY, in 1997.

 
Field infiltration rates at the V6 stage averaged the most in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation, which also had the greatest earthworm densities (Table 3). Earthworm densities and field infiltration at the V6 stage, however, did not have a significant correlation, which is inconsistent with the results of Willoughby et al. (1997), who reported a positive correlation between earthworm densities and infiltration rates shortly after corn planting. Crop rotation did not affect field infiltration rates at the R3 stage, which is consistent with the results of Trojan and Linden (1998). Crop rotation x tillage system interactions did not exist for field infiltration rates at either the V6 or R3 growth stages.

Crop rotation did not affect air-filled porosity and did not interact with tillage systems at the V6 or R3 growth stages (data not shown). Moldboard plow tillage had greater air-filled porosity in the soil water potential range of -2.5 to -40 kPa at the V6 stage compared with chisel and ridge tillage (Fig. 2) . Chisel and moldboard plow tillage generally have greater porosity compared with no-till during early corn growth (Hill, 1990; Lal et al., 1994; Cassel et al., 1995), so it was surprising that chisel and ridge tillage had similar porosity in our study. All three tillage systems had similar porosity at soil water potential values of -2.5 kPa or greater, which indicates macroporosity, as defined by Carter and Ball (1993), did not differ among the three tillage systems (Fig. 2). Likewise, total porosity did not differ among moldboard plow (0.51 m-3 m-3), chisel (0.51 m-3 m-3), and ridge tillage (0.49 m-3 m-3) systems.



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. Air-filled porosity at different soil water potential values placed on a log scale of three tillage systems at the sixth leaf stage (V6) of corn growth. Vertical bars indicate the LSD (0.05) values for tillage systems.

 
The interrow had greater air-filled porosity than the row position at a soil water potential of -1 kPa and in the -5 to -40 kPa range at the V6 stage (Fig. 3) . A tillage x row position interaction did not exist, so it is not clear why the cultivated interrow in ridge tillage and noncultivated interrow in chisel and moldboard plow tillage had greater air-filled porosity compared with the row. Row position and tillage systems did not affect porosity at the R3 stage (data not shown).



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Air-filled porosity at different soil water potential values placed on a log scale of two row positions at the sixth leaf stage (V6) of corn growth. Vertical bars indicate the LSD (0.05) values for row position.

 
A tillage x crop rotation interaction existed for corn yield in 1997 because of the relatively high yield in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation in moldboard plow tillage but relatively low yield in ridge tillage (Table 4). The relatively low yield in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation in ridge tillage was associated in part with low corn densities and N availability, as previously explained by Katsvairo and Cox (2000). Despite factors other than soil management influencing corn yields, corn yields had significant linear and quadratic relationships with some soil measurements. For example, earthworm densities had a positive linear relationship and field infiltration rates at the V6 stage a positive quadratic relationship with 1997 corn yields (Table 5). Also, bulk density at the V6 and R3 growth stages had negative linear relationships with 1997 corn yields, which agrees with the findings of Vyn and Raimbault (1993). Apparently, these soil characteristics, which explained between 11 and 40% of the variability in corn yields, as well as agronomic factors such as corn densities and N availability (Katsvairo and Cox, 2000), contributed to corn yield differences in 1997.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 4. Corn yields under three tillage systems and three crop rotations at Aurora, NY, in 1997.

 

View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 5. Regressions of 1997 corn yields with soil measurements at the sixth leaf stage (V6) and early grain fill (R3) stages of corn growth at Aurora, NY. Soil measurements not listed were not significant (P = 0.05).

 

   CONCLUSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
REFERENCES
 
Crop rotation affected earthworm densities shortly after corn emergence but did not affect soil physical measurements, except for infiltration rates during vegetative growth of corn. Nevertheless, earthworm densities explained 27% and infiltration rates during vegetative development 24% of the variability in corn yields. Tillage, which did not affect earthworm densities, affected all soil physical measurements during vegetative growth but only infiltration rates during reproductive growth of corn. The soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation had the greatest earthworm densities and infiltration rates among crop rotations during corn vegetative growth. Likewise, moldboard plow tillage had the greatest infiltration rates among tillage systems. Corn in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation yielded about 15 to 25% greater in moldboard plow tillage than in chisel and ridge tillage. Corn in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation in moldboard plow tillage also yielded about 20% greater than corn in the soybean–corn rotation and about 40% greater than continuous corn, regardless of tillage system. Greater infiltration rates in the soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotation in moldboard plow tillage may have contributed in part to its significant corn yield advantage in 1997 when precipitation during grain fill (August) was 50 mm below normal. Tillage x crop rotation interactions did not exist for any soil physical measurements, which indicates that 5-yr tillage effects on soil physical characteristics would be consistent across continuous corn, soybean–corn, or soybean–wheat/clover–corn rotations.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
 CONCLUSION
 REFERENCES
 




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
H. Blanco-Canqui and R. Lal
Axle-Load Impacts on Hydraulic Properties and Corn Yield in No-Till Clay and Silt Loam
Agron. J., November 7, 2008; 100(6): 1673 - 1680.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
R. L. Anderson
Growth and Yield of Winter Wheat as Affected by Preceding Crop and Crop Management
Agron. J., June 16, 2008; 100(4): 977 - 980.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
T. W. Katsvairo, D. L. Wright, J. J. Marois, D. L. Hartzog, K. B. Balkcom, P. P. Wiatrak, and J. R. Rich
Cotton Roots, Earthworms, and Infiltration Characteristics in Sod-Peanut-Cotton Cropping Systems
Agron. J., February 6, 2007; 99(2): 390 - 398.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Agron. J.Home page
T. W. Katsvairo, D. L. Wright, J. J. Marois, D. L. Hartzog, J. R. Rich, and P. J. Wiatrak
Sod-Livestock Integration into the Peanut-Cotton Rotation: A Systems Farming Approach
Agron. J., June 27, 2006; 98(4): 1156 - 1171.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Soil Sci.Home page
H. Blanco-Canqui, R. Lal, L. B. Owens, W. M. Post, and R. C. Izaurralde
Strength Properties and Organic Carbon of Soils in the North Appalachian Region
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., April 11, 2005; 69(3): 663 - 673.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Soil Sci.Home page
H. Blanco-Canqui, C. J. Gantzer, S. H. Anderson, and E. E. Alberts
Tillage and Crop Influences on Physical Properties for an Epiaqualf
Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., March 1, 2004; 68(2): 567 - 576.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (12)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Katsvairo, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Es, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Katsvairo, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Es, H.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Katsvairo, T.
Right arrow Articles by van Es, H.
Related Collections
Right arrow Crop Rotation Systems
Right arrow Hydraulic Conductivity
Right arrow Structure and Properties
Right arrow Soil Biology
Right arrow Other Soil Management
Right arrow Tillage

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
The SCI Journals Crop Science Vadose Zone Journal
Journal of Natural Resources
and Life Sciences Education		 Soil Science Society of America Journal
Journal of Plant Registrations Journal of
Environmental Quality		 The Plant Genome