Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:17:36.557Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effect of a slant-legged subsoiler on soil compaction and the growth of direct-drilled winter wheat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

N. A. Hipps  and
D. R. Hodgson
N. A. Hipps
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, Agricultural Sciences Building, The University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9Jt
D. R. Hodgson
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Sciences, Agricultural Sciences Building, The University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9Jt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The effect of a slant-legged subsoiler (Trade name, ‘Paraplow’) on the growth of two crops of winter wheat following an intensively grazed grass-clover ley was investigated in 1981–2 and 1982–3. The treatments for the first crop were direct drilling, loosening the soil by shallow cultivation before drilling, loosening by ‘Paraplow’, and a combination of ‘Paraplow’ and shallow cultivation. For the second crop these treatments were repeated and a fifth added, loosening by ‘Paraplow’ after drilling. Seed was sown with a triple disk direct drill and all treatments received the same quantity of fertilizer.

Soil compaction was measured with a cone penetrometer in the autumn of 1982 and spring 1983; root axes were counted and dry-matter weights of shoot, grain yield and components of yield obtained.

Loosening soil by ‘Paraplow’ did not increase significantly the number of roots nor was the uptake of water by the crop in dry periods affected, even though soil strength, measured as cone resistance, was considerably reduced.

Shallow cultivation increased grain yield in the first wheat by 0·34 t/ha (P< 0·05) but had no effect on the second wheat. The ‘Paraplow’ did not increase yield of the first crop but the mean response of 0·65 t/ha in the second crop was significant (P < 0·05). Using the ‘Paraplow’ before or after drilling gave similar yields. Increases in yield were produced by more grains per unit area, not increased 1000-grain weights.

It is concluded that the apparently compacted soil did not restrict the growth of wheat and that the beneficial effect of the ‘Paraplow’ in the second crop was probably due to better drainage in the wet spring.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 109 , Issue 1 , August 1987 , pp. 79 - 85
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1987

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

Anderson, G., Pidgeon, J. D., Spencer, H. B. & Parks, R. (1980). A new hand held recording penetrometer for soil studies. Journal of Soil Science 31, 279–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery, B. W. (1980). Soil classification for England and Wales (Higher Categories). Soil Survey Technical Monograph, no. 14, Harpenden, U.K.Google Scholar
Braim, M. A., Chaney, K. & Hodgson, D. R. (1984). Preliminary investigation on the response of spring barley to soil cultivation with the ‘Paraplow’. Soil and Tillage Research 4, 277–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaney, K., Hodgson, D. R. & Braim, M. A. (1985). The effects of direct drilling, shallow cultivation and ploughing on some soil physical properties in a long-term experiment on spring barley. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 104, 125–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, D. B., Pidgeon, J. D., Lord, E. & Gowman, M. (1982). Responses to deep loosening by the ‘Paraplow’ in continuous cereal production. Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Soil Tillage Research Organisation, Osijek, Yugoslavia, 1982, pp. 591–596.Google Scholar
Drew, M. C. & Saker, L. R. (1980). Assessment of a rapid method, using soil cores, for estimating the amount and distribution of crop roots in the field. Plant and Soil 55, 297–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehlers, W., Kopke, U., Hesse, F. & 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
Hipps, N. A. (1985). The effects of a slant-legged subsoiler on soil physical conditions and the growth of cereals. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Plant Sciences, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
Hodgson, D. R., Proud, J. R. & Browne, S. (1977). Cultivation systems for spring barley with special reference to direct drilling (1971–1974). Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 88, 631–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ide, G., Hofman, G., Ossemerct, C. & Van Ruymbete, M. (1982). Influence of subsoiling on the growth of cereals. Pedologie 32, 193–207.Google Scholar
Ide, G., Hofman, C., Ossemerct, C. & Van Ruymbeke, M. (1984). Root growth response of winter barley to subsoiling. Soil and Tillage Research 4, 419–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaddah, M. T. (1976). Subsoiling, chiselling and slip plowing effects on soil properties and wheat grown on a stratified fine sandy soil. Agronomy Journal 68, 36–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Large, E. C. (1954). Growth stages of cereals. Plant Pathology 3, 128–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McEwen, J. & Johnson, A. E. (1979). The effects of subsoiling and deep incorporation of P and K fertilizers on the yield and nutrient uptake of barley, potatoes, wheat and sugar beet grown in rotation. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 92, 695–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pidgeon, J. D. (1982). ‘Paraplow’ -a rational approach to soil management. Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the International Soil Tillage Research Organisation, Osijek, Yugoslavia, 1982, pp. 633–638.Google Scholar
Stockholm, E. (1977). Subsoiling on clay soils. Tidsskrift for Planteavl 81, 271–292.Google Scholar
Swain, R. W. (1975). Subsoiling. In Soil Physical Conditions and Crop Production, Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, Technical Bulletin no. 29, pp. 189–204. London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar