Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:26:31.281Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Quantitative characterization of five cover crop species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2014

J. RAMIREZ-GARCIA ,
J. L. GABRIEL ,
M. ALONSO-AYUSO  and
M. QUEMADA
J. RAMIREZ-GARCIA
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture Engineering, Technical University of Madrid, Avd. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
J. L. GABRIEL
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture Engineering, Technical University of Madrid, Avd. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
M. ALONSO-AYUSO
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture Engineering, Technical University of Madrid, Avd. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
M. QUEMADA*
Affiliation:
School of Agriculture Engineering, Technical University of Madrid, Avd. Complutense s/n, 28040 Madrid, Spain
*
*To whom all correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The introduction of cover crops in the intercrop period may provide a broad range of ecosystem services derived from the multiple functions they can perform, such as erosion control, recycling of nutrients or forage source. However, the achievement of these services in a particular agrosystem is not always required at the same time or to the same degree. Thus, species selection and definition of targeted objectives is critical when growing cover crops. The goal of the current work was to describe the traits that determine the suitability of five species (barley, rye, triticale, mustard and vetch) for cover cropping. A field trial was established during two seasons (October to April) in Madrid (central Spain). Ground cover and biomass were monitored at regular intervals during each growing season. A Gompertz model characterized ground cover until the decay observed after frosts, while biomass was fitted to Gompertz, logistic and linear-exponential equations. At the end of the experiment, carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and fibre (neutral detergent, acid and lignin) contents, and the N fixed by the legume were determined. The grasses reached the highest ground cover (83–99%) and biomass (1226–1928 g/m2) at the end of the experiment. With the highest C:N ratio (27–39) and dietary fibre (527–600 mg/g) and the lowest residue quality (~680 mg/g), grasses were suitable for erosion control, catch crop and fodder. The vetch presented the lowest N uptake (2·4 and 0·7 g N/m2) due to N fixation (9·8 and 1·6 g N/m2) and low biomass accumulation. The mustard presented high N uptake in the warm year and could act as a catch crop, but low fodder capability in both years. The thermal time before reaching 30% ground cover was a good indicator of early coverage species. Variable quantification allowed finding variability among the species and provided information for further decisions involving cover crop selection and management.

Type
Crops and Soils Research Papers
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , Volume 153 , Issue 7 , September 2015 , pp. 1174 - 1185
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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

REFERENCES

Alcántara, C., Sánchez, S., Pujadas, A. & Saavedra, M. (2009). Brassica species as winter cover crops in sustainable agricultural systems in southern Spain. Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 33, 619–635.Google Scholar
Bodner, G., Himmelbauer, M., Loiskandl, W. & Kaul, H.-P. (2010). Improved evaluation of cover crop species by growth and root factors. Agronomy for Sustainable Development 30, 455–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, G., Shirley, C. & Cramer, C. (2000). Benefits of cover crops. In Managing Cover Crops Profitably (Ed. Clark, A.), pp. 9–11. Beltsville, USA: Sustainable Agriculture Network.Google Scholar
Chaves, B., De Neve, S., Hofman, G., Boeckx, P. & Van Cleemput, O. (2004). Nitrogen mineralization of vegetable root residues and green manures as related to their (bio)chemical composition. European Journal of Agronomy 21, 161–170.Google Scholar
Chirino, E., Bonet, A., Bellot, J. & Sánchez, J. (2006). Effects of 30-year-old Aleppo pine plantations on runoff, soil erosion, and plant diversity in a semi-arid landscape in south eastern Spain. Catena (Giessen) 65, 19–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Den Hollander, N. G., Bastiaans, L. & Kropff, M. J. (2007). Clover as a cover crop for weed suppression in an intercropping design: I. Characteristics of several clover species. European Journal of Agronomy 26, 92–103.Google Scholar
Díaz, S., Lavorel, S., de Bello, F., Quétier, F., Grigulis, K. & Robson, T. M. (2007). Incorporating plant functional diversity effects in ecosystem service assessments. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 104, 20684–20689.Google Scholar
Foley, M. E. (1999). Genetic approach to the development of cover crops for weed management. Journal of Crop Production 2, 77–93.Google Scholar
Francis, C. F. & Thornes, J. B. (1990). Runoff hydrographs from three Mediterranean vegetation cover types. In Vegetation and Erosion: Processes and Environments (Ed. Thornes, J. B.), pp. 363–384. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Gabriel, J. L. & Quemada, M. (2011). Replacing bare fallow with cover crops in a maize cropping system: yield, N uptake and fertiliser fate. European Journal of Agronomy 34, 133–143.Google Scholar
Gabriel, J. L., Almendros, P., Hontoria, C. & Quemada, M. (2012). The role of cover crops in irrigated systems: soil salinity and salt leaching. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 158, 200–207.Google Scholar
Gallejones, P., Castellón, A., del Prado, A., Unamunzaga, O. & Aizpurua, A. (2012). Nitrogen and sulphur fertilization effect on leaching losses, nutrient balance and plant quality in a wheat–rapeseed rotation under a humid Mediterranean climate. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 93, 337–355.Google Scholar
Gan, Y. T., Liang, B. C., Liu, L. P., Wang, X. Y. & McDonald, C. L. (2011). C:N ratios and carbon distribution profile across rooting zones in oilseed and pulse crops. Crop and Pasture Science 62, 496–503.Google Scholar
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Forage Fiber Analyses (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures, and Some Applications). ARS/USDA Handbook No. 379. Washington, DC: Superintendent of Documents, US Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Hartwig, N. L. & Ammon, H. U. (2002). Cover crops and living mulches. Weed Science 50, 688–699.Google Scholar
Kuo, S., Sainju, U. M. & Jellum, E. J. (1997). Winter cover crop effects on soil organic carbon and carbohydrate in soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal 61, 145–152.Google Scholar
Lancashire, P. D., Bleiholder, H., Van den Boom, T., Langelüddeke, P., Stauss, R., Weber, E. & Witzenberger, A. (1991). A uniform decimal code for growth stages of crops and weeds. Annals of Applied Biology 119, 561–601.Google Scholar
Langdale, G. W., Blevins, R. L., Karlen, D. L., McCool, D. K., Nearing, M. A., Skidmore, E. L., Thomas, A. W., Tyler, D. D. & Williams, J. R. (1991). Cover crop effects on soil erosion by wind and water. In Cover Crops for Clean Water (Ed. Hargrove, W. L.), pp. 15–22. Ankeny, IA, USA: Soil and Water Conservation Society.Google Scholar
Liu, H., Jiang, G. M., Zhuang, H. Y. & Wang, K. J. (2008). Distribution, utilization structure and potential of biomass resources in rural China: with special references of crop residues. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 12, 1402–1418.Google Scholar
Mojtahedi, H., Santo, G. S., Hang, A. N. & Wilson, J. H. (1991). Suppression of root-knot nematode populations with selected rapeseed cultivars as green manure. Journal of Nematology 23, 170–174.Google Scholar
Pegelow, E. J., Taylor, B. B., Horrocks, R. D., Buxton, D. R., Marx, D. B. & Wanjura, D. F. (1977). The Gompertz function as a model for cotton hypocotyl elongation. Agronomy Journal 69, 875–878.Google Scholar
Peoples, M. B., Herridge, D. F. & Ladha, J. K. (1995). Biological nitrogen fixation: an efficient source of nitrogen for sustainable agricultural production? Plant and Soil 174, 3–28.Google Scholar
Qiu, X., Eastridge, M. L. & Wang, Z. (2003). Effects of corn silage hybrid and dietary concentration of forage NDF on digestibility and performance by dairy cows. Journal of Dairy Science 86, 3667–3674.Google Scholar
Quemada, M. (2004). Predicting crop residue decomposition using moisture adjusted time scales. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 70, 283–291.Google Scholar
Quemada, M. & Cabrera, M. L. (1995). Carbon and nitrogen mineralized from leaves and stems of four cover crops. Soil Science Society of America Journal 59, 471–477.Google Scholar
Quemada, M. & Cabrera, M. L. (2002). Characteristic moisture curves and maximum water content of two crop residues. Plant and Soil 238, 295–299.Google Scholar
Quemada, M., Cabrera, M. L. & McCracken, D. V. (1997). Nitrogen release from surface-applied cover crop residues: evaluating the CERES-N submodel. Agronomy Journal 89, 723–729.Google Scholar
Quinton, J. N., Edwards, G. M. & Morgan, R. P. C. (1997). The influence of vegetation species and plant properties on runoff and soil erosion: results from a rainfall simulation study in south east Spain. Soil Use and Management 13, 143–148.Google Scholar
Ramirez-Garcia, J., Almendros, P. & Quemada, M. (2012). Ground cover and leaf area index relationship in a grass, legume and crucifer crop. Plant, Soil and Environment 58, 385–390.Google Scholar
Reeves, D. W. (1994). Cover crops and rotations. In Advances in Soil Science: Crops Residue Management (Eds Hatfield, J. L. & Stewart, B. A.), pp. 125–172. Boca Raton, USA: Lewis Publishers.Google Scholar
Schomberg, H. H., Steiner, J. L. & Unger, P. W. (1994). Decomposition and nitrogen dynamics of crop residues: residue quality and water effects. Soil Science Society of America Journal 58, 372–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorup-Kristensen, K. (2001). Are differences in root growth of nitrogen catch crops important for their ability to reduce soil nitrate-N content, and how can this be measured? Plant and Soil 230, 185–195.Google Scholar
Thorup-Kristensen, K., Magid, J. & Jensen, L. S. (2003). Catch crops and green manures as biological tools in nitrogen management in temperate zones. Advances in Agronomy 79, 227–302.Google Scholar
Tosti, G., Benincasa, P., Farneselli, M., Pace, R., Tei, F., Guiducci, M. & Thorup-Kristiensen, K. (2012). Effects of pure and mixed barley – hairy vetch winter cover crops on maize and processing tomato N nutrition. European Journal of Agronomy 43, 136–146.Google Scholar
Unger, P. W. & Vigil, M. F. (1998). Cover crop effects on soil water relationships. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 53, 200–207.Google Scholar
Vos, J. & van der Putten, P. E. L. (2004). Nutrient cycling in a cropping system with potato, spring wheat, sugar beet, oats and nitrogen catch crops. II. Effect of catch crops on nitrate leaching in autumn and winter. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 70, 23–31.Google Scholar