Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T20:53:14.054Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Use of an integrative soil health test for evaluation of soil management impacts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2009

O.J. Idowu ,
H.M. van Es ,
G.S. Abawi ,
D.W. Wolfe ,
R.R. Schindelbeck ,
B.N. Moebius-Clune  and
B.K. Gugino
O.J. Idowu*
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
H.M. van Es
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
G.S. Abawi
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, NYSAES, Cornell University, Geneva, NY 14456, USA.
D.W. Wolfe
Affiliation:
Department of Horticulture, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
R.R. Schindelbeck
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
B.N. Moebius-Clune
Affiliation:
Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
B.K. Gugino
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
*
*Corresponding author: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Understanding the response of soil quality indicators to changes in management practices is essential for sustainable land management. Soil quality indicators were measured for 2 years under established experiments with varying management histories and durations at four locations in New York State. The Willsboro (clay loam) and Aurora (silt loam) experiments were established in 1992, comparing no-till (NT) to plow-till (PT) management under corn (Zea mays L.)–soybean (Glycine max L.) rotation. The Chazy (silt loam) trial was established in 1973 as a factorial experiment comparing NT versus PT and the crop harvesting method (corn silage versus corn grain). The Geneva (silt loam) experiment was established in 2003 with vegetable rotations with and without intervening soil building crops, each under three tillage methods (NT, PT and zone-till (ZT)) and three cover cropping systems (none, rye and vetch). Physical indicators measured were wet aggregate stability (WAS), available water capacity (AWC) and surface hardness (SH) and subsurface hardness (SSH). Soil biological indicators included organic matter (OM), active carbon (AC), potentially mineralizable nitrogen (PMN) and root disease potential (RDP). Chemical indicators included pH, P, K, Mg, Fe, Mn and Zn. Results from the Willsboro and Aurora sites showed significant tillage effects for several indicators including WAS, AWC, OM, AC, pH, P, K, Mg, Fe and Mn. Generally, the NT treatment had better indicator values than the PT treatments. At the Chazy site, WAS, AWC, OM, AC, pH, K and Mg showed significant differences for tillage and/or harvest method, also with NT showing better indicator values compared to PT and corn grain better than corn silage. Aggregate stability was on average 2.5 times higher in NT compared to PT treatments at Willsboro, Aurora and Chazy sites. OM was also 1.2, 1.1 and 1.5 times higher in NT compared to PT treatments at Willsboro, Aurora and Chazy sites, respectively. At the Geneva site WAS, SH, AC, PMN, pH, P, K and Zn showed significant tillage effects. The cover crop effect was only significant for SH and PMN measurements. Indicators that gave consistent performance across locations included WAS, OM and AC, while PMN and RDP were site and management dependent. The composite soil health index (CSHI) significantly differentiated between contrasting management practices. The CSHI for the Willsboro site was 71% for NT and 59% for PT, while at the Aurora site it was 61% for NT and 48% for PT after 15 years of tillage treatments.

Keywords

soil qualitysoil healthtillagesoil quality indicatorsCornell Soil Health Test
Type
Research Papers
Information
Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , September 2009 , pp. 214 - 224
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1Larson, W.E. and Pierce, F.J. 1991. Conservation and enhancement of soil quality. In Dumanski, J. (ed.). Evaluation for Sustainable Land Management in the Developing World, Vol. 2: Technical Papers. Proceedings of International Workshop, Chaning Rai, Thailand, 15–21 September 1990. International Board for Soil Research Management, Bangkok, Thailand. p. 175–203.Google Scholar
2Doran, J.W. and Parkin, T.B. 1994. Defining and assessing soil quality. In Doran, J.W., Coleman, D.C., Bzedicek, D.F., and Stewart, B.A. (eds). Defining Soil Quality for a Sustainable Environment. SSSA Special Publication No. 35, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3Karlen, D.L., Mausbach, M.J., Doran, J.W., Cline, R.G., Harris, R.F., and Schuman, G.E. 1997. Soil quality: a concept, definition, and framework for evaluation. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61:4–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4Arshad, M.A. and Coen, G.M. 1992. Characterization of soil quality: physical and chemical criteria. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 7:25–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5Andrews, S.S., Karlen, D.L., and Mitchell, J.P. 2002. A comparison of soil quality indexing methods for vegetable production systems in Northern California. Agriculture, Ecosystem and Environment 90:25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6Karlen, D.L., Hurley, E.G., Andrews, S.S., Cambardella, C.A., Meek, D.W., Duffy, M.D., and Mallarino, A.P. 2006. Crop rotation effects on soil quality at three northern corn/soybean belt locations. Agronomy Journal 98:484–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7Bouma, J. 1989. Using soil survey data for quantitative land evaluation. Advances in Soil Science 9:177–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8Liebig, M.A., Varvel, G., and Doran, J. 2001. A simple performance-based index for assessing multiple agroecosystem functions. Agronomy Journal 93:313–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9Andrews, S.S., Karlen, D.L., and Cambardella, C.A. 2004. The soil management assessment framework: a quantitative soil quality evolution method. Soil Science Society of America Journal 68:1945–1962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10Idowu, O.J., van Es, H.M., Abawi, G.S., Wolfe, D.W., Ball, J.I., Gugino, B.K., Moebius, B.N., Shindelbeck, R.R., and Bilgili, A.V. 2008. Farmer-oriented assessment of soil quality using field, laboratory, and VNIR spectroscopy methods. Plant and Soil 307:243–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11Karlen, D.L., Ditzler, C.A., and Andrews, S.S. 2003. Soil quality: why and how? Geoderma 114:145–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12Moebius, B.N., van Es, H.M., Schindelbeck, R.R., Idowu, O.J., Clune, D.J., and Thies, J.E. 2007. Evaluation of laboratory-measured soil properties as indicators of soil physical quality. Soil Science 172:895–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13Andrews, S.S. and Carroll, C.R. 2001. Designing a soil quality assessment tool for sustainable agroecosystem management. Ecological Applications 11:1573–1585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14Varvel, G., Riedell, W., Deibert, E., McConkey, B., Tanaka, D., Vigil, M., and Schwartz, R. 2006. Great Plains cropping system studies for soil quality assessment. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 21:3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15Liebig, M., Carpenter-Boggs, L., Johnson, J.M.F., Wright, S., and Barbour, N. 2006. Cropping system effects on soil biological characteristics in the Great Plains. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 21:36–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16Mikha, M.M., Vigil, M.F., Liebig, M.A., Bowman, R.A., McConkey, B., Deibert, E.J., and Pikul, J.L. 2006. Cropping system influences on soil chemical properties and soil quality in the Great Plains. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 21:26–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17Pikul, J.L., Schwartz, R.C., Benjamin, J.G., Baumhardt, R.L., and Merrill, S. 2006. Cropping system influences on soil physical properties in the Great Plains. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 21:15–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
18Liebig, M.A., Tanaka, D.L., and Wienhold, B.J. 2004. Tillage and cropping effects on soil quality indicators in the northern Great Plains. Soil and Tillage Research 78:131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19Soil Survey Staff. 2006. Keys to Soil Taxonomy, 10th ed.USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
20van Es, H.M. and van Es, C.L. 1993. Spatial nature of randomization and its effect on the outcome of field experiments. Agronomy Journal 85:420–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
21Gugino, B.K., Idowu, O.J., Schindelbeck, R.R., van Es, H.M., Wolfe, D.W., Moebius, B.N., Thies, J.E., and Abawi, G.S. 2007. Cornell Soil Health Assessment Training Manual Edition 1.2. Cornell University, Geneva, NY.Google Scholar
22Ogden, C.B., Vanes, H.M., and Schindelbeck, R.R. 1997. Miniature rain simulator for field measurement of soil infiltration. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61:1041–1043.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
23Soil Compaction Tester. 2008. Dickey-John, Auburn, IL. http://www.dickey-john.com/products/agriculture/soil-compaction-testing/soil-compaction-tester/ (verified 1 October 2008).Google Scholar
24Nelson, D.W. and Sommers, L.E. 1996. Total carbon, organic carbon, and organic matter. In Sparks, D.L. (ed.). Methods of Soil Analysis. Part 3. SSSA Book Series 5. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 961–1010.Google Scholar
25Weil, R.W., Islam, K.R., Stine, M.A., Gruver, J.B., and Samson-Liebig, S.E. 2003. Estimating active carbon for soil quality assessment: a simplified method for laboratory and field use. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 18:3–17.Google Scholar
26Drinkwater, L.E., Cambardella, C.A., Reeder, J.D., and Rice, C.W. 1996. Potentially mineralizable nitrogen as an indicator of biologically active soil nitrogen. In Doran, J.W. and Jones, A.J. (eds). Methods for Assessing Soil Quality. Special Edition No. 49. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI. p. 217–229.Google Scholar
27Abawi, G.S., Ludwig, J.W., and Petzoldt, C.H. 2004. Assessing root health by a soil bioassay with beans as an indicator of soil health. Phytopathology 94:(Suppl.):S1 (Abstract No. 579B).Google Scholar
28Kettler, T.A., Doran, J.W., and Gilbert, T.L. 2001. Simplified method for soil particle-size determination to accompany soil-quality analyses. Soil Science Society of America Journal 65:849–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29SPSS Inc. 2006. SPSS for Windows, Release 15. SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
30Brejda, J.J., Moorman, T.B., Karlen, D.L., and Dao, T.H. 2000. Identification of regional soil quality factors and indicators: I. Central and southern High Plains. Soil Science Society of America Journal 64:2115–2124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
31Stine, M.A. and Weil, R.R. 2002. The relationship between soil quality and crop productivity across three tillage systems in south central Honduras. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture 17:2–8.Google Scholar
32Carter, M.R. 2002. Soil quality for sustainable land management: organic matter and aggregation interactions that maintain soil functions. Agronomy Journal 94:38–47.Google Scholar
33Six, J., Bossuyt, H., Degryze, S., and Denef, K. 2004. A history of research on the link between (micro) aggregates, soil biota, and soil organic matter dynamics. Soil and Tillage Research 79:7–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34Wienhold, B.J., Pikul, J.L. Jr, Liebig, M.A., Mikha, M.M., Varvel, G.E., Doran, J.W., and Andrews, S.S. 2006. Cropping system effects on soil quality in the Great Plains: synthesis from a regional project. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 21:49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
35Wuest, S.B. 2007. Surface versus incorporated residue effects on water-stable aggregates. Soil and Tillage Research 96:124–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
36Singh, B. and Malhi, S.S. 2006. Response of soil physical properties to tillage and residue management on two soils in a cool temperate environment. Soil and Tillage Research 85:143–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
37Denef, K. and Six, J. 2005. Clay mineralogy determines the importance of biological versus abiotic processes for macroaggregate formation and stabilization. European Journal of Soil Science 56:469–479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
38Curtin, D., Campbell, C.A., Zentner, R.P., and Lafond, G.P. 1994. Long-term management and clay dispersibility in 2 Haploborolls in Saskatchewan. Soil Science Society of America Journal 58:962–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
39Horn, R., Taubner, H., Wuttke, M., and Baumgartl, T. 1994. Soil physical properties related to soil structure. Soil and Tillage Research 30:187–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
40Atwell, B.J. 1993. Response of roots to mechanical impedance. Environmental and Experimental Botany 33:27–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
41Sojka, R.E., Busscher, W.J., Gooden, D.T., and Morrison, W.H. 1990. Subsoiling for sunflower production in the Southeast Coastal Plains. Soil Science Society of America Journal 54:1107–1112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
42Ehlers, W., Kopke, U., Hesse, F., and Bohm, W. 1983. Penetration resistance and root growth of oats in tilled and untilled loess soil. Soil and Tillage Research 3:261–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
43Wander, M.M. and Bollero, G.A. 1999. Soil quality assessment of tillage impacts in Illinois. Soil Science Society of America Journal 63:961–971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
44Karunatilake, U.P. and van Es, H.M. 2002. Rainfall and tillage effects on soil structure after alfalfa conversion to maize on a clay loam soil in New York. Soil and Tillage Research 67:135–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45Lampurlanes, J. and Cantero-Martinez, C. 2003. Soil bulk density and penetration resistance under different tillage and crop management systems and their relationship with barley root growth. Agronomy Journal 95:526–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
46Blanco-Canqui, H. and Lal, R. 2008. No-Tillage and soil profile carbon sequestration: an on-farm assessment. Soil Science Society of America Journal 72:693–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
47Cambardella, C.A. and Elliott, E.T. 1992. Particulate soil organic matter changes across a grassland cultivation sequence. Soil Science Society of America Journal 56:777–783.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
48Rasmussen, P.E., Albrecht, S.L., and Smiley, R.W. 1998. Soil C and N changes under tillage and cropping systems in semi-arid Pacific Northwest agriculture. Soil and Tillage Research 47:197–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
49Oades, J.M. 1988. The retention of organic matter in soils. Biogeochemistry 5:35–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
50Tisdall, J.M. and Oades, J.M. 1982. Organic matter and water stable aggregates in soil. Journal of Soil Science 33:141–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
51Angers, D.A., Bolinder, M.A., Carter, M.R., Gregorich, E.G., Drury, C.F., Liang, B.C., Voroney, R.P., Simard, R.R., Donald, R.G., Beyaert, R.P., and Martel, J. 1997. Impact of tillage practices on organic carbon and nitrogen storage in cool, humid soils of eastern Canada. Soil and Tillage Research 41:191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
52Campbell, C.A., McConkey, B.G., Zentner, R.P., Selles, F., and Curtin, D. 1996. Long-term effects of tillage and crop rotations on soil organic C and total N in a clay soil in southwestern Saskatchewan. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 76:395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
53Abawi, G.S. and Widmer, T.L. 2000. Impact of soil health management practices on soilborne pathogens, nematodes and root diseases of vegetable crops. Applied Soil Ecology 15:37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
54Cornell University Cooperative Extension. 2008. Cornell Guide for Integrated Field Crop Management. Cornell University Cooperative Extension Publication, New York, NY.Google Scholar