Interactive Effect of Land Preparation Methods and Weeding Frequency on Seasonal Soil Properties and Maize Yield



Abstract Views
388

Downloads
288

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Sep 9, 2020
Published Oct 3, 2020
10.24018/ejfood.2020.2.5.114

Abstract viewed = 388 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Dynamics of soil physical properties and maize yield were investigated in both major and minor cropping seasons under different land preparation methods and weeding frequency. A factorial design experiment was organized on a randomized complete block design with three replicates. The land preparation methods were plough + harrow (P + H) and no-tillage (NT) while weeding frequency treatments comprised 0, 1, 2 and 3-hoeing regimes. In both seasons, P + H yielded good penetration resistance and bulk density, high moisture content and total porosity, and maximum total grain yield than NT. Also, agitating the soil surface at different weeding frequency improved soil physical properties and maize yield parameters. Furthermore, lower penetration resistance and bulk density but higher moisture content and porosity were recorded on hoeing regime(s) than 0-hoeing. The interactive effect of land preparation methods versus weeding frequency on soil properties was significant except penetration resistance during minor season and total porosity during major season. Maximum total grain yield was obtained from P + H vs 2-hoeing treatment plots in both seasons. Generally, increasing weeding frequency on P + H plots enhanced soil physical properties and maize yield than NT treatment plots. Therefore, to obtain suitable seasonal soil conditions for crop production, cultivable soils should be ploughed, harrowed and hoed twice at 2nd and 5th weeks after ploughing (WAP).

Keywords: Soil properties, land preparation methods, weeding frequency, minor and major season

References

  1. J. W. Doran and T. B. Parkin, Defining and assessing soil quality. Defining soil quality for a sustainable environment. 1994 May 1; 35: 1-21.
     Google Scholar
  2. E. J. Russell, Soil Conditions and Plant Growth, Longmans: London, 1961, p.333
     Google Scholar
  3. G. Den Herder, G. Van Isterdael, T. Beeckman and I. De Smet. [November 2010]. The roots of a new green revolution. Trends in plant science [Online]. 15(11). pp. 600-7. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1360138510001780
     Google Scholar
  4. P. J. Gregory. [February 2006]. Roots, rhizosphere and soil: the route to a better understanding of soil science? European Journal of Soil Science [online]. 57(1). Pp. 2-12. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2005.00778.x
     Google Scholar
  5. E. A Stockdale and P. C. Brookes. [August 2006]. Detection and quantification of the soil microbial biomass–impacts on the management of agricultural soils. The Journal of Agricultural Science [Online]. 144(4). pp. 285-302. Available: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-agricultural-science/article/detection
     Google Scholar
  6. A. Hodge [January 2006] Plastic plants and patchy soils. Journal of experimental botany [Online]. 57(2). pp. 401-11. Available: https://academic.oup.com/jxb/article/57/2/401/489917
     Google Scholar
  7. E. N. Gacheru, M. K. O'Neill, G. M. Kamau, H. M. Saha and G. D. Odhiambo. [January 1993]. Effect of land preparation and weeding on maize (Zea mays) grain yields in the coastal region of Kenya. International Journal of Pest Management [Online]. 39(1). pp 57-60. Available: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09670879309371759
     Google Scholar
  8. A. W. Massawe, W. Rwamugira, H. Leirs, H. R. Makundi and L. S. Mulungu. [2005]. Influence of Land Preparation Methods and Vegetation Cover on Population Abundance of Mastomysnatalensis in Morogoro, Tanzania, Belg. Journal of Zoology [Online]. 135. pp. 187-190.
     Google Scholar
  9. S. H. M. Aikins and J. J. Afuakwa [2010]. Effect of Four Different Tillage Practices on Cowpea Performance. World Journal of Agricultural Sciences [Online]. 6(6). pp. 644–651. Available: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.415.5214&rep=rep1&type=pdf
     Google Scholar
  10. J. D. Jabro, W. B. Stevens, R. G. Evans and W. M. Iversen. [2009]. Tillage Effects on Physical Properties in Two Soils of the Northern Great Plains. Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 25(3). pp. 377–382. Available: https://pubag.nal.usda.gov/catalog/35057
     Google Scholar
  11. G. D. Massa and S. Gilroy. [February 2003]. Touch Modulates Gravity Sensing to Regulate the Primary Roots of Arabidopsis Thaliana. The Plant Journal [Online]. 33(3). pp. 435 – 445. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1365-313X.2003.01637.x
     Google Scholar
  12. J. W. Elder and R. Lal. [March 2008]. Tillage Effects on Physical Properties of Agricultural Organic Soils of North Central Ohio. Soil & Tillage Research [Online]. 98(2). pp. 208–210. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198707002206
     Google Scholar
  13. M. Rashidi, F. Keshavarzpour and M. Gholami. [2008]. Effect of Different Tillage Methods on Yield and Yield Components of Forage Corn, American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Science, 3: 347-351.
     Google Scholar
  14. S. Ozpinar and A. Isik. [January 2004]. Effects of Tillage, Ridging and Row Spacing on Seedling Emergence and Yield of Cotton. Soil & Tillage Research [Online]. 75(1): 19–26. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198703002010
     Google Scholar
  15. S. H. M. Aikins and J. J. Afuakwa. [2012]. Effect of Four Different Tillage Practices on Soil Physical Properties under Cowpea. Agriculture and Biology Journal of North America [Online], 3(1). pp. 17-24. Available: https://scihub.org/ABJNA/PDF/2012/1/ABJNA-3-1-17-24.pdf
     Google Scholar
  16. J. O. Olaoye. [March 2002]. Influence of Tillage on Crop Residue Cover, Soil Properties and Yield Components of Cowpea in Derived Savannah Ectones of Nigeria. Soil & Tillage Research [Online], 64(3-4): 179–187. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198701002616
     Google Scholar
  17. J. C. Faria, C. E. R. Schaefer, H. A. Ruiz and L. M. Costa. [1998]. Effects of Weed Control on Physical and Micropedological Properties of a Brazilian Ultisol. R. Bras. Ci. Solo [Online]. 22. pp. 731-741. Available: https://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbcs/v22n4/19.pdf
     Google Scholar
  18. O. I. Akobundu and C. W. Agyakwa. A Handbook of West African Weeds (2nd Edn.). International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, African Book Builders Ltd, 1998. Nigeria.
     Google Scholar
  19. B. A. Senjobi, O. T. Ande and A. E. Okulaja. [July 2013]. Effects of Tillage Practices on Soil Properties under Maize Cultivation on Oxic Paleustalf in South Western Nigeria. Open Journal of Soil Science [Online]. 3(3). pp. 163-168. Available: https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=33800
     Google Scholar
  20. S. V. Adu. Soils of the Kumasi Region, Ashanti Region, Ghana. Memoir No. 8. CSIR-Soil Research Institute, Kumasi, 1992.
     Google Scholar
  21. D. D. Fritton [June 2008]. Evaluation of pedotransfer and measurement approaches to avoid soil compaction. Soil and Tillage Research [Online]. 99(2): 268 – 278. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198708000585
     Google Scholar
  22. D. Sinnett, G. Morgan, M. Williams and T. R. Hutchings. [September 2008]. Soil penetration resistance and tree root development. Soil Use and Management [Online], 24(3): 273 – 280. Available: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00164.x
     Google Scholar
  23. P. J. Gregory and S. Nortcliff. Soil Conditions and Plant Growth. A John Wiley & Sons: UK. 2013.
     Google Scholar
  24. Blanco-Canqui, H., Lal, R. and Post, W. M., Izaurralde, R. C. and Shipitalo, M. J. [July 2006]. Organic Carbon Influences on Soil Particle Density and Rheological Properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal [Online], 70(4): 1407 – 1414. Available: https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2136/sssaj2005.0355
     Google Scholar
  25. MINITAB Inc. 2007. MINITAB Statistical Software Release 15 for Windows. Minitab Inc. State College, Pennsylvania.
     Google Scholar
  26. A. Khalilian, C. E. Hood, J. H. Palmer, T. H. Garner and G. R. Bathke. [1991]. Soil Compaction and Crop Response to Wheat/Soybean Interseeding. Transaction of the ASAE [Online]. 34(6), 2299–2303. Available: https://elibrary.asabe.org/abstract.asp?aid=31871
     Google Scholar
  27. J. G. Benjamin, D. C. Nielsen and M. F. Vigil. [September 2003]. Quantifying Effects of Soil Conditions on Plant Growth and Crop Production. Geoderma [Online]. 116(1-2). pp. 137-148. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0016706103000983
     Google Scholar
  28. A. G. Bengough Root growth and function in relation to soil structure, composition, and strength. In: Root Ecology (eds H. de Kroon and E.J.W. Visser), 2003. pp. 151 – 171. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
     Google Scholar
  29. W. W. Emerson, R. C. Foster, J. M. Tisdall and D. Weissmann. [1994]. Carbon Content and Bulk-Density of an Irrigated Natrixeralf in Relation to Tree Root-Growth and Orchard Management. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 32(5). pp. 939 – 951. Available: https://www.publish.csiro.au/sr/SR9940939
     Google Scholar
  30. K. M. Hati, K. G. Mandal, A. K. Misra, P. K. Ghosh and K. K. Bandyopadhyay. [November 2006]. Effect of Inorganic Fertilizer and Farmyard Manure on Soil Physical Properties, Root Distribution, and Water-Use Efficiency of Soybean in Vertisols of Central India. Bioresource Technology [Online]. 97(16). pp. 2182 – 2188. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960852405004797
     Google Scholar
  31. NC, Brady and RR. Weil The nature and properties of soil 12th ed. Mac. Pub. Com. New York. 1999: pp. 625-40.
     Google Scholar
  32. T. Keller and I. Hakansson. [January 2010]. Estimation of Reference Bulk Density from Soil Particle Size Distribution and Soil Organic Matter Content. Geoderma [Online], 154(3-4). pp. 398 – 406. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0016706109003644
     Google Scholar
  33. R. H. Azooz, M. A. Arshad and A. J. Franzluebbers [July 1996]. Pore Size Distribution and Hydraulic Conductivity as Affected by Tillage in Northwestern Canada. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. [Online]. 60(4): pp. 1197–1201. Available: https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2136/sssaj1996.03615995006000040034x
     Google Scholar
  34. B. D Kay and A. J. VandenBygaart, [2002]. Conservation Tillage and Depth Stratification of Porosity and Soil Organic Matter. Soil & Tillage Research, 66: 107–118.
     Google Scholar
  35. D. K. Cassel, C. W. Raczkowski and H. P. Denton, [1995]. Tillage Effects on Corn Production and Soil Physical Properties, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Journal, 59: 1436-1443.
     Google Scholar
  36. Radford, B. J., Yule, D. F., McGarry, D. and Playford, C. 2001. Crop Responses to Applied Soil Compaction and to Compaction Repair Treatments. Soil and Tillage Research, 61: 157–166.
     Google Scholar
  37. E. A. Ogan, [2004]. Effects of Urea fertilizer application and tillage practices on the growth and yield components of maize, Crop Science Research, 4(3): 311-317.
     Google Scholar
  38. H.F. Abouziena, M.F. El-Karmany, M. Singh and S.D. Sharma. (2007). Effect of Nitrogen Rates and Weed Control Treatments on Maize Yield and Associated Weeds in Sandy Soils, Weed Technology, 21(10): 49–53.
     Google Scholar
  39. A.R. Adenawoola, R.D. Aladesanwa and T.D. Adenowuro. [2005]. Effects of frequency of weeding on the growth and yield of long-fruited jute (Corchorus olitorius) in a rainforest area of southwestern Nigeria, Crop Protection, 24: 407–411.
     Google Scholar