On farm assessment of tillage impact on soil carbon and associated soil quality parameters

Chatterjee, A.; Lal, R.

doi:10.1016/J.STILL.2009.03.006

BonaResKnowledge Library

Add a paper Sign in

All papers

Soil and Tillage Research · 2009

On farm assessment of tillage impact on soil carbon and associated soil quality parameters

Chatterjee, A., Lal, R.

Read the paperSave

Export

On farm assessment of tillage impact on soil carbon and asso…

No abstract in the library.

Findings

What changed what, as the paper reports it. Grouped by the measured property. The largest groups are open; open the others as you need them.

bulk density

↑ 9↓ 1= 111

increase
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–10 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)
Numbers

Similar papers

On farm assessment of tillage impact on soil carbon and associated soil quality parameters · Knowledge Library

SOC on area basis

↑ 9↓ 1= 111

increase
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee)
Numbers
- treatment 21.9 vs. control 16.1 Mg ha-1 (+36.02 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 22 vs. control 13.9 Mg ha-1 (+58.27 %) · MLRA111
Source · p. 5
“Within 0–5 cm soil depth, NT soil had higher SOC content than PT soils by 36 and 58% under MLRAs 99 and 111, respectively.”
decrease
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 50–60 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)
Numbers
- treatment 4.93 vs. control 10.5 Mg ha-1 (-53.05 %)
Source · p. 5
“At deeper soil profiles (50–60 cm soil depth), the only significant difference between NT and PT soils was found under MLRA 139, where NT soil had lower SOC content (4.93 Mg ha 1) than PT soil (10.5 Mg ha 1).”
no effect
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)not significant · 0–60 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton) · MLRA 127 (Salisbury) · Integrated profile; printedTable5totals for139/127 inconsistent with layer sums, not recomputed.
Numbers
- treatment 104 vs. control 97.6 Mg ha-1 (+6.557 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 79 vs. control 82.3 Mg ha-1 (-4.01 %) · MLRA111
- treatment 143 vs. control 117 Mg ha-1 (+22.22 %) · MLRA124
- treatment 66.7 vs. control 46.3 Mg ha-1 (+44.06 %) · MLRA139 printed totals
- treatment 83.4 vs. control 96.4 Mg ha-1 (-13.49 %) · MLRA127 printed totals
Source · p. 7
“soil depth) was not different in any of the five MLRAs.”
Source · p. 1
“there was no significant difference (P < 0.05) between NT and PT practices across five soils.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–60 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto)
Numbers
- treatment 129 vs. control 104 Mg ha-1 (+24.04 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 115 vs. control 79 Mg ha-1 (+45.57 %) · MLRA111
- treatment 206 vs. control 143 Mg ha-1 (+44.06 %) · MLRA124
Source · p. 5
“Considering the whole soil profile (60 cm), WL soils had significantly higher profile SOC content than NT soils by 24, 44 and 46% under MLRAs 99,124 and 111, respectively.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–60 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto)
Numbers
- treatment 129 vs. control 97.6 Mg ha-1 (+32.17 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 115 vs. control 82.3 Mg ha-1 (+39.73 %) · MLRA111
- treatment 206 vs. control 117 Mg ha-1 (+76.07 %) · MLRA124
Source · p. 1
“WL had higher SOC pool than NT and PT practices under MLRAs 99, 111 and 124”
Source · p. 5
“206 (5.62) a”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–30 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · Incremental SOC stocks: MLRA 99 only 0-10 cm; MLRA 111 0-30 cm. Depth runs stated in Results, not integrated 0-60 cm totals of finding-23. Other layers have overlapping letters.
Numbers
- treatment 28.8 vs. control 21.9 Mg ha-1 (+31.51 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 27.7 vs. control 18 Mg ha-1 (+53.89 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 28.4 vs. control 22 Mg ha-1 (+29.09 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 20.8 vs. control 16.3 Mg ha-1 (+27.61 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 32.8 vs. control 23 Mg ha-1 (+42.61 %) · 10–30 cm · MLRA 111
Source · p. 5
“Within 5–10 cm soil depth, WL soils had higher SOC content than NT and soils by 28 and 54% under MLRAs 111and 99, respectively.”
Source · p. 5
“Within 10–30 cm soil depth increment, WL had higher SOC content than NT under MLRAs 111 and 124.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 10–50 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · MLRA 124 incremental SOC stocks, not integrated profile total. Surface 0-10 cm and 50-60 cm share letters; increase limited to 10-50 cm.
Numbers
- treatment 62.1 vs. control 42.7 Mg ha-1 (+45.43 %) · 10–30 cm
- treatment 56.2 vs. control 28.8 Mg ha-1 (+95.14 %) · 30–50 cm
Source · p. 5
“Within 10–30 cm soil depth increment, WL had higher SOC content than NT under MLRAs 111 and 124.”
Source · p. 5
“WL soil had higher SOC content (56.2 Mg ha 1) than NT (28.8 Mg ha 1) and PT (34.8 Mg ha 1) soils under MLRA 124.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton) · MLRA 139 incremental SOC stock; deeper layers and integrated profile total have no pair separation.
Numbers
- treatment 15.3 vs. control 11.7 Mg ha-1 (+30.77 %) · 0–5 cm
Source · p. 5
“WL soils had higher total SOC content than NT soils by 29, 31 and 32% under MLRAs 111, 139 and 99, respectively at 0–5 cm soil depth.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–10 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 99 and 111 incremental surface SOC stocks; Table 5 a/c at 0-5 cm and a/b at 5-10 cm. Not integrated totals in finding-24.
Numbers
- treatment 28.8 vs. control 16.1 Mg ha-1 (+78.88 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 27.7 vs. control 15.9 Mg ha-1 (+74.21 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 28.4 vs. control 13.9 Mg ha-1 (+104.3 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 20.8 vs. control 15.2 Mg ha-1 (+36.84 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 111
Source · p. 5
“The impacts of NT practice on SOC content by depth were inconsistent and varied among MLRAs (Table 5).”
Source · p. 5
“Within 5–10 cm soil depth, WL soils had higher SOC content than NT and soils by 28 and 54% under MLRAs 111and 99, respectively.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 30–50 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · MLRA 124 incremental stock, explicitly reported depth comparison; not integrated profile total.
Numbers
- treatment 56.2 vs. control 34.8 Mg ha-1 (+61.49 %) · 30–50 cm
Source · p. 5
“WL soil had higher SOC content (56.2 Mg ha 1) than NT (28.8 Mg ha 1) and PT (34.8 Mg ha 1) soils under MLRA 124.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 50–60 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 111 incremental SOC stock, explicit deeper-layer result, separated from surface run by shared letters at 10-50 cm.
Numbers
- treatment 14.7 vs. control 6.96 Mg ha-1 (+111.2 %) · 50–60 cm
Source · p. 5
“At the same depth increment under MLRA 111, WL soil had higher SOC content (14.7 Mg ha 1) than PT (6.96 Mg ha 1).”

SOC concentration

↑ 5↓ 27

increase
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 127 (Salisbury)
Numbers
- treatment 30.7 vs. control 23.7 g kg-1 (+29.54 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 29.3 vs. control 19.5 g kg-1 (+50.26 %) · MLRA111
- treatment 36.5 vs. control 21.8 g kg-1 (+67.43 %) · MLRA127
Source · p. 4
“NT soil had significantly”
Source · p. 5
“higher SOC concentration than PT soils by 30, 50 and 67% under MLRAs 99, 111 and 127, respectively.”
decrease
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 5–10 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)
Numbers
- treatment 11.4 vs. control 19.3 g kg-1 (-40.93 %)
Source · p. 5
“The only significant difference in SOC concentration between NT and PT within 5–10 cm soil depth was found under MLRA 139, where PT soil had a higher SOC concentration”
decrease
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 50–60 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)
Numbers
- treatment 2.8 vs. control 7.5 g kg-1 (-62.67 %)
Source · p. 5
“At 50–60 cm soil depth, PT soil had a higher SOC concentration of 7.50 g kg 1 than NT soil (2.80 g kg 1) under MLRA 139.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–30 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence)
Numbers
- treatment 66 vs. control 30.7 g kg-1 (+115 %) · 0–5 cm
- treatment 56.4 vs. control 23.4 g kg-1 (+141 %) · 5–10 cm
- treatment 32.6 vs. control 19.7 g kg-1 (+65.48 %) · 10–30 cm
Source · p. 4
“WL soil had higher SOC concentration than NT and PT soils at 0–5 cm depth under four MLRAs (99, 111, 124 and 139)”
Source · p. 5
“Within 10– 30 and 30–50 cm soil depths, WL had a higher SOC concentration than NT under MLRAs 99, 111, 124, and under MLRAs 111 and 124, respectively.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–50 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · 0-50 cm by letters; in MLRA 111 at 30-50 cm the difference is below the printed LSD
Numbers
- treatment 51.2 vs. control 29.3 g kg-1 (+74.74 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA111
- treatment 32.5 vs. control 20.3 g kg-1 (+60.1 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA111
- treatment 24.9 vs. control 14 g kg-1 (+77.86 %) · 10–30 cm · MLRA111
- treatment 11.9 vs. control 6.7 g kg-1 (+77.61 %) · 30–50 cm · MLRA111
- treatment 72.5 vs. control 21.7 g kg-1 (+234.1 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA124
- treatment 58.8 vs. control 17.5 g kg-1 (+236 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA124
- treatment 38 vs. control 16.2 g kg-1 (+134.6 %) · 10–30 cm · MLRA124
- treatment 32 vs. control 15.3 g kg-1 (+109.2 %) · 30–50 cm · MLRA124
Source · p. 5
“Within 10– 30 and 30–50 cm soil depths, WL had a higher SOC concentration than NT under MLRAs 99, 111, 124, and under MLRAs 111 and 124, respectively.”
Source · p. 4
“WL soil had higher SOC concentration than NT and PT soils at 0–5 cm depth under four MLRAs (99, 111, 124 and 139)”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)
Numbers
- treatment 21.3 vs. control 15.8 g kg-1 (+34.81 %)
Source · p. 4
“WL soil had higher SOC concentration than NT and PT soils at 0–5 cm depth under four MLRAs (99, 111, 124 and 139)”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · MLRA 99, 111, 124; MLRA 139 excluded because WL a and PT ab overlap. Adjacent unreplicated fields, three within-field pseudo-replicates.
Numbers
- treatment 66 vs. control 23.7 g kg-1 (+178.5 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 51.2 vs. control 19.5 g kg-1 (+162.6 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 72.5 vs. control 26.6 g kg-1 (+172.6 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 124
Source · p. 4
“WL soil had higher SOC concentration than NT and PT soils at 0–5 cm depth under four MLRAs (99, 111, 124 and 139)”

total soil nitrogen on area basis

↑ 3↓ 1= 15

increase
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 127 (Salisbury)
Numbers
- treatment 1.92 vs. control 1.51 Mg ha-1 (+27.15 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 2.28 vs. control 1.48 Mg ha-1 (+54.05 %) · MLRA111
- treatment 2.29 vs. control 1.59 Mg ha-1 (+44.03 %) · MLRA127
Source · p. 5
“total soil N content was higher in NT soil than PT soils by 27, 44 and 54% under MLRAs 99, 127 and 111, respectively.”
decrease
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 30–50 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence)
Numbers
- treatment 1.36 vs. control 2.35 Mg ha-1 (-42.13 %)
Source · p. 5
“Under the same MLRA (99), PT soil had higher soil N content (2.35 Mg ha 1) than NT (1.36 Mg ha 1) at 30–50 cm soil depth.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–30 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · Incremental N stocks: MLRA 99 0-30 cm; MLRA 111 only 0-10 cm. Other layers share letters. Distinct depth comparisons from integrated profile totals in finding-28.
Numbers
- treatment 2.3 vs. control 1.92 Mg ha-1 (+19.79 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 2.55 vs. control 1.64 Mg ha-1 (+55.49 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 4.25 vs. control 3.17 Mg ha-1 (+34.07 %) · 10–30 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 2.62 vs. control 2.28 Mg ha-1 (+14.91 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 2.1 vs. control 1.67 Mg ha-1 (+25.75 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 111
Source · p. 5
“Within 0–5 cm soil depth, WL soil had higher soil N content than NT and PT soils under MLRAs 99 and 111 (Table 6).”
Source · p. 5
“At 5– 10 cm soil depth, WL had higher total soil N content than NT by 26 and 55% under MLRAs 111 and 99, respectively.”
Source · p. 5
“Only within MLRA 99, WL soil had higher N content (4.25 Mg ha 1) than NT (3.17 Mg ha 1) and PT (3.30 Mg ha 1) soils at 10–30 cm depth.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–30 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · Incremental N stocks: MLRA 99 0-30 cm (surface and 10-30 cm Results statements merged with intervening Table 6 pair); MLRA 111 0-5 cm only. Three within-field pseudo-replicates, not replicated fields.
Numbers
- treatment 2.3 vs. control 1.51 Mg ha-1 (+52.32 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 2.62 vs. control 1.48 Mg ha-1 (+77.03 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 2.55 vs. control 1.51 Mg ha-1 (+68.87 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 4.25 vs. control 3.3 Mg ha-1 (+28.79 %) · 10–30 cm · MLRA 99
Source · p. 5
“Within 0–5 cm soil depth, WL soil had higher soil N content than NT and PT soils under MLRAs 99 and 111 (Table 6).”
Source · p. 5
“Only within MLRA 99, WL soil had higher N content (4.25 Mg ha 1) than NT (3.17 Mg ha 1) and PT (3.30 Mg ha 1) soils at 10–30 cm depth.”
no effect
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)not significant · 0–60 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton) · MLRA 127 (Salisbury) · Explicit whole-profile N null outside MLRA 99; Table 6 b/ab at 111 and a/a at 124,139,127. Published total-column inconsistencies require source clarification; no disputed total means copied or recomputed.
Source · p. 5
“Only significant difference in profile N content between NT and PT soil was found under MLRA 99 and NT soil had higher profile N content of 10.5 Mg N ha 1 than PT soil (9.42 Mg N ha 1).”
Source · p. 1
“However, whole soil profile N content of NT soil was significantly higher by 12% than PT soil under MLRA 99.”

CPOM-N concentration

↑ 4↓ 15

increase
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 127 (Salisbury)
Numbers
- treatment 5.88 vs. control 2.86 g kg-1 soil (+105.6 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 6.05 vs. control 2.19 g kg-1 soil (+176.3 %) · MLRA111
- treatment 9.77 vs. control 4.57 g kg-1 soil (+113.8 %) · MLRA127
Source · p. 5
“CPOM-N concentration showed almost same trend like CPOM-C in both soil depths except under 139”
Source · p. 1
“Concentrations of CPOM associated C and N of NT soil was higher than PT soil under MLRAs 99, 111 and 127 at 0–5 soil depth.”
decrease
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 5–10 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)
Numbers
- treatment 0.99 vs. control 3.28 g kg-1 soil (-69.82 %)
Source · p. 5
“PT (3.28 g kg”
Source · p. 5
“1) had a higher CPOM-N than NT (0.99 g kg 1)at5– 10 cm soil depth.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–10 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee)
Numbers
- treatment 12.6 vs. control 5.88 g kg-1 soil (+114.3 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA99
- treatment 9.61 vs. control 3.43 g kg-1 soil (+180.2 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA99
- treatment 8.81 vs. control 6.05 g kg-1 soil (+45.62 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA111
- treatment 4.61 vs. control 2.71 g kg-1 soil (+70.11 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA111
Source · p. 5
“CPOM-N concentration showed almost same trend like CPOM-C in both soil depths except under 139”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 124 (Scioto)
Numbers
- treatment 30.6 vs. control 2.9 g kg-1 soil (+955.2 %)
Source · p. 5
“CPOM-N concentration showed almost same trend like CPOM-C in both soil depths except under 139”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–10 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · CPOM-N: MLRA 99 and 111 0-10 cm; MLRA 124 only 0-5 cm. No extension to 139 or 127. Entire dispersed >53 micrometre fraction, not isolated free POM; existing variable reused. Published units retained.
Numbers
- treatment 12.6 vs. control 2.86 g kg-1 soil (+340.6 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 9.61 vs. control 2.55 g kg-1 soil (+276.9 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 8.81 vs. control 2.19 g kg-1 soil (+302.3 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 4.61 vs. control 2.21 g kg-1 soil (+108.6 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 30.6 vs. control 4.24 g kg-1 soil (+621.7 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 124
Source · p. 5
“CPOM-N concentration showed almost same trend like CPOM-C in both soil depths except under 139”

CPOM-C concentration

↑ 44

increase
no-tillage (NT) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 127 (Salisbury)
Numbers
- treatment 92.4 vs. control 47.7 g kg-1 soil (+93.71 %) · MLRA99
- treatment 79.3 vs. control 33 g kg-1 soil (+140.3 %) · MLRA111
- treatment 123 vs. control 68.2 g kg-1 soil (+80.35 %) · MLRA127
Source · p. 5
“CPOM-C concentration of NT was significantly higher than PT under MLRAs 99, 111 and 127 within 0–5 cm soil depth”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–10 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee)
Numbers
- treatment 202 vs. control 92.4 g kg-1 soil (+118.6 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA99
- treatment 139 vs. control 46.8 g kg-1 soil (+197 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA99
- treatment 128 vs. control 79.3 g kg-1 soil (+61.41 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA111
- treatment 60.9 vs. control 31.6 g kg-1 soil (+92.72 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA111
Source · p. 5
“WL had a higher CPOM-C than NT and/or PT under most MLRAs at the same soil depth increment. Within 5–10 cm soil depth, WL had a higher CPOM-C concentration than NT and PT under MLRA 99 and”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. no-tillage (NT)significant · 0–5 cm · summer2008 · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)
Numbers
- treatment 440 vs. control 40.7 g kg-1 soil (+981.1 %) · MLRA124
- treatment 63.7 vs. control 37.8 g kg-1 soil (+68.52 %) · MLRA139
Source · p. 5
“WL had a higher CPOM-C than NT and/or PT under most MLRAs at the same soil depth increment.”
increase
woodlot (WL) vs. plow tillage (PT)significant · 0–10 cm · summer 2008 · MLRA 99 (Temperence) · MLRA 111 (Lenawee) · MLRA 124 (Scioto) · CPOM-C: MLRA 99 and 111 0-10 cm; MLRA 124 only 0-5 cm. MLRA 139 and 127 excluded for overlapping letters. Entire dispersed >53 micrometre fraction, not isolated free POM; existing variable reused. Published g/kg soil retained despite implausible magnitude.
Numbers
- treatment 202 vs. control 47.7 g kg-1 soil (+323.5 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 139 vs. control 40 g kg-1 soil (+247.5 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 99
- treatment 128 vs. control 33 g kg-1 soil (+287.9 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 60.9 vs. control 32.4 g kg-1 soil (+87.96 %) · 5–10 cm · MLRA 111
- treatment 440 vs. control 58 g kg-1 soil (+658.6 %) · 0–5 cm · MLRA 124
Source · p. 5
“WL had a higher CPOM-C than NT and/or PT under most MLRAs at the same soil depth increment. Within 5–10 cm soil depth, WL had a higher CPOM-C concentration than NT and PT under MLRA 99 and”

Sites

MLRA 99 (Temperence)

Location: Temperence, MI41.84° N, 83.54° W
Soil: Agriaquolls (typic, fine, mixed, active, mesic) · USDA
Land use: cultivated fieldsArable land, woodlotForests

Soil layers
Depth	Texture	Clay	pH	Organic C	Bulk density
Pewamo site soil (depth not stated)	clay loam	–	–	–	–

MLRA 111 (Lenawee)

Location: Lenawee, MI41.78° N, 83.77° W
Soil: epiaqualfs (mollic, fine, illitic, mesic) · USDA
Land use: cultivated fieldsArable land, woodlotForests

Soil layers
Depth	Texture	Clay	pH	Organic C	Bulk density
Hoytville site soil (depth not stated)	clay loam and silty clay loam	–	–	–	–

MLRA 124 (Scioto)

Location: Scioto, OH39.08° N, 83.00° W
Soil: Eutrudepts (fluventic, fine-loamy, mixed, superactive, mesic) · USDA
Land use: cultivated fieldsArable land, woodlotForests

MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)

Location: Canal Fulton, OH40.89° N, 81.56° W
Soil: Hapludalfs (typic, fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic) · USDA
Land use: cultivated fieldsArable land, woodlotForests

Soil layers
Depth	Texture	Clay	pH	Organic C	Bulk density
Chili site soil (depth not stated)	silt loam	–	–	–	–

MLRA 127 (Salisbury)

Location: Salisbury, PA
Soil: Fragiudults (aquic, fine-loamy, mixed, active, mesic) · USDA
Land use: cultivated fieldsArable land, woodlotForests

Soil layers
Depth	Texture	Clay	pH	Organic C	Bulk density
Cookport site soil (depth not stated)	loam	–	–	–	–

On farm assessment of tillage impact on soil carbon and associated soil quality parameters

Findings

bulk density

Similar papers

Conversion of Slope Cropland to Terrace Influences Soil Organic Carbon and Nitrogen Stocks on the Chinese Loess Plateau

Conservation tillage increases soil bacterial diversity in the dryland of northern China

Impact of Grazing Intensity on Floristic Diversity and Soil Properties in Semi-Natural Grasslands of Jbel Bouhachem (Northern Morocco)

On farm assessment of tillage impact on soil carbon and associated soil quality parameters

Findings

bulk density

Similar papers

Conversion of Slope Cropland to Terrace Influences Soil Organic Carbon and Nitrogen Stocks on the Chinese Loess Plateau

Conservation tillage increases soil bacterial diversity in the dryland of northern China

Impact of Grazing Intensity on Floristic Diversity and Soil Properties in Semi-Natural Grasslands of Jbel Bouhachem (Northern Morocco)

SOC on area basis

SOC concentration

total soil nitrogen on area basis

CPOM-N concentration

CPOM-C concentration

electrical conductivity (EC)

sand content

clay content

NO3-N concentration

soil pH

silt content

Set-up

Treatments

Measured

Sites

MLRA 99 (Temperence)

MLRA 111 (Lenawee)

MLRA 124 (Scioto)

MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)

MLRA 127 (Salisbury)

Erodibility of Vertisols in relation to agricultural practices along a toposequence in the Logone floodplain

A cover crop and no-tillage system for enhancing soil health by increasing soil organic matter in soybean cultivation

Abstract

Findings

bulk density

Similar papers

Conversion of Slope Cropland to Terrace Influences Soil Organic Carbon and Nitrogen Stocks on the Chinese Loess Plateau

Conservation tillage increases soil bacterial diversity in the dryland of northern China

Impact of Grazing Intensity on Floristic Diversity and Soil Properties in Semi-Natural Grasslands of Jbel Bouhachem (Northern Morocco)

Abstract

Findings

bulk density

Similar papers

Conversion of Slope Cropland to Terrace Influences Soil Organic Carbon and Nitrogen Stocks on the Chinese Loess Plateau

Conservation tillage increases soil bacterial diversity in the dryland of northern China

Impact of Grazing Intensity on Floristic Diversity and Soil Properties in Semi-Natural Grasslands of Jbel Bouhachem (Northern Morocco)

SOC on area basis

SOC concentration

total soil nitrogen on area basis

CPOM-N concentration

CPOM-C concentration

electrical conductivity (EC)

sand content

clay content

NO3-N concentration

soil pH

silt content

Set-up

Treatments

Measured

Sites

MLRA 99 (Temperence)

MLRA 111 (Lenawee)

MLRA 124 (Scioto)

MLRA 139 (Canal Fulton)

MLRA 127 (Salisbury)

Erodibility of Vertisols in relation to agricultural practices along a toposequence in the Logone floodplain

A cover crop and no-tillage system for enhancing soil health by increasing soil organic matter in soybean cultivation