Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Tillage and residue management effects on irrigated maize performance and water cycling in a semiarid cropping system of Eastern Colorado

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Irrigation Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Residue removal from maize (Zea mays) fields offers an opportunity to increase farmer profits, but potential tradeoffs for water dynamics and crop performance merit further evaluation. This study, established in 2014, compared the effects of two tillage practices (no-till and conventional) and two residue management practices (harvested vs. kept in place) on maize grain yields, water infiltration, evapotranspiration, and soil physical attributes. On average, maize grain yields under limited irrigation increased with residue retention by 1.1 Mg ha−1 year−1 between 2016 and 2018, but tillage had no significant effect. Total infiltration (over 30 min) was higher with residue retention. Neither tillage nor residue management had a significant impact on evapotranspiration during the vegetative growth stage. However, there was a significant residue by tillage interaction where vegetative evapotranspiration was reduced by no-till and residue retention. Conversely, penetrometer resistance was significantly reduced by both tillage and residue retention. Volumetric water content in the soil profile at planting was higher with residue retention. These results suggest that plots with residue removal would on average require 60 mm year−1 of additional irrigation to attain the same yields as fields with residue retention. In summary, our findings suggest that high rates of crop residue removal under limited irrigation in a semiarid environment can negatively affect water conservation and yields, and that tradeoffs surrounding residue export need to be fully considered in land management and policy decisions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baumhardt RL, Johnson GL, Schwartz RC (2012) Residue and long-term tillage and crop rotation effects on simulated rain infiltration and sediment transport. Soil Sci Soc Am J 76:1370–1378. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2011.0331

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blanco-Canqui H, Stone LR, Schlegel A, Lyon D, Vigil M, Mikha M, Stahlman P, Rice C (2009) No-till induced increase in organic carbon reduces maximum bulk density of soils. Soil Sci Soc Am J 73:1871–1879. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2008.0353

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman DH, King KM (1965) Determination of evapotranspiration using the neutron scattering method. Can J Soil Sci 45:117–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghuman BS, Sur H (2001) Tillage and residue management effects on soil properties and yields of rainfed maize and wheat in a subhumid subtropical climate. Soil Tillage Res 58:1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halvorson AD, Stewart CE (2015) Stover removal affects no-till irrigated corn yields, soil carbon, and nitrogen. Agron J 107:1504–1512. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj15.007

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Halvorson AD, Mosier AR, Reule CA, Bausch WC (2006) Nitrogen and tillage effects on irrigated continuous corn yields. Agron J 98:63–71. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0174

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kimble J, Rice CW, Reed D, Mooney S, Follett RF, Lal R (2007) Soil carbon management: economic, environmental, and societal benefits. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Klocke NL, Schneekloth JP, Watts DG (1996) Potential for reducing leaching by managing water and crop rotations. J Soil Water Cons 51(1):84–90

    Google Scholar 

  • Klocke NL, Currie RS, Aiken RM (2009) Soil water evaporation and crop residues. Trans ASABE 52(1):103–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lal R (1985) Mechanised tillage systems effects on soil properties in watershed growing maize on Alfisol in western Nigeria. Soil Tillage Res 6(2):149–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamm FR, Aiken RM, Abou Kheira AA (2009) Corn yield and water use characteristics as affected by tillage, plant density, and irrigation. Trans ASABE 52(1):133–143. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.25954

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuire VL (2017) Water-level and recoverable water in storage changes, high plains aquifer, predevelopment to 2015 and 2013–15: US Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2017–5040, p 14. https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20175040

  • Melman DA, Kelly C, Schneekloth J, Calderon F, Fonte SJ (2019) Tillage and residue management drive rapid changes in soil macrofauna communities and soil properties in a semiarid cropping system of Eastern Colorado. Appl Soil Ecol 143:98–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.05.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen DC (1998) Snow catch and soil water recharge in standing sunflower residue. J Prod Agric 11:476–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen DC, Vigil MF (2010) Precipitation storage efficiency during fallow in wheat-fallow systems. Agron J 102:537–543. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2009.0348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen DC, Unger PW, Miller PR (2005) Efficient water use in dryland cropping systems in the great plains. Agron J 97:364–372. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2005.0364

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogden CB, van Es HM, Schindelbeck RR (1997) Miniature rain simulator for field measurement of soil infiltration. Soil Sci Soc Am J 61:1041–1043. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1997.03615995006100040008x

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pittelkow CM, Linquist BA, Lundy ME, Liang X, van Groenigen KJ, Lee J, van Gestel N, Six J, Venterea RT, van Kessel C (2015a) When does no-till yield more? A global meta-analysis. Field Crops Res 183:156–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittelkow CM, Liang X, Linquist BA, van Groenigen KJ, Lee J, Lundy ME, van Gestel N, Six J, Venterea RT, van Kessel C (2015b) Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture. Nature 517:365–368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Potter KN, Torbert HE, Morrison J (1995) Tillage and residue effects on infiltration and sediment losses on vertisols. Trans ASAE 38(5):1413–1419. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.27965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchie JT (1972) Model for predicting evaporation from a row crop with incomplete cover. Water Resour Res 8(5):1204–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stalker LA, Blanco-Canqui H, Gigax JA, McGee AL, Shaver TM, van Donk SJ (2015) Corn residue stocking rate affects cattle performance but not subsequent grain yield. J Amin Sci 2015:4977–4983. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas2015-9259

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ulmer KM, Rasby RJ, MacDonald JC, Blanco-Canqui H, Rakkar MK, Cox JL, Bondurant RG, Jenkin KH, Drewnoski ME (2018) Baling or grazing of corn residue does not reduce crop production in central united states. Agron J 110:112–127. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2018.04.0226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van Donk SJ, Martin DL, Irmak S, Melvin SR, Petersen JL, Davison DR (2010) Crop residue cover effects on evaporation, soil water content, and yield of deficit-irrigated corn in west-central Nebraska. Trans ASABE 53(6):1787–1797

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilhelm W, Johnson JMF, Hatfield JL, Voorhees WB, Linden DR (2004) Crop and soil productivity response to corn residue removal: a literature review. Agron J 96:1–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This publication is based on work that is supported by the United States Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture under award number 2016-68007-25066, “Sustaining agriculture through adaptive management to preserve the Ogallala aquifer under a changing climate,” and under Hatch project 1015698. Several of the research efforts in this work have also been supported by the USDA-ARS Ogallala Aquifer Program—a multistate effort supporting the efficient and beneficial use of the Ogallala aquifer. Funding for this project was also supported by Colorado Corn. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names is for the information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an official endorsement or approval by the United States Department of Agriculture or the Agricultural Research Service of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be suitable. The USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Colorado State University Water Resources Institute and Extension, Akron, CO, USA

    Joel Schneekloth

  2. USDA-Agricultural Research Service, Akron, CO, USA

    Francisco Calderón & David Nielsen

  3. Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA

    Steven J. Fonte

Authors
  1. Joel Schneekloth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francisco Calderón
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Nielsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Steven J. Fonte
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joel Schneekloth.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Communicated by Samuel Ortega-Farias .

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schneekloth, J., Calderón, F., Nielsen, D. et al. Tillage and residue management effects on irrigated maize performance and water cycling in a semiarid cropping system of Eastern Colorado. Irrig Sci 38, 547–557 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-020-00702-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-020-00702-2

Search

Navigation