Topsoil compaction and recovery in integrated no - tilled crop - livestock systems of Argentina

Cattle trampling during grazing of crop residue may cause physical soil damage that may be repaired when animals are excluded. Understanding the interplay between soil deterioration and natural recovery of the soil physical condition allows for a better understanding of grazing management systems. V...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Fernández, Patricia Lilia
Otros Autores: Alvarez, Carina Rosa, Taboada, Miguel Angel
Formato: Artículo
Lenguaje:Español
Materias:
BOS
Acceso en línea:http://ri.agro.uba.ar/files/intranet/articulo/2015fernandez.pdf
LINK AL EDITOR
Aporte de:Registro referencial: Solicitar el recurso aquí
LEADER 03370cab a22005537a 4500
001 AR-BaUFA000768
003 AR-BaUFA
005 20220920131050.0
008 181208t2015 |||||o|||||00||||spa d
999 |c 47164  |d 47164 
999 |d 47164 
022 |a 0167-1987 
024 |a 10.1016/j.still.2015.05.008 
040 |a AR-BaUFA 
100 1 |9 33912  |a Fernández, Patricia Lilia 
245 0 0 |a Topsoil compaction and recovery in integrated no - tilled crop - livestock systems of Argentina 
520 |a Cattle trampling during grazing of crop residue may cause physical soil damage that may be repaired when animals are excluded. Understanding the interplay between soil deterioration and natural recovery of the soil physical condition allows for a better understanding of grazing management systems. Various soil physical properties [i.e., bulk density [BD], penetration resistance [PR], infiltration rate, structural instability] were determined up to 20cm depth in a silty loam Typic Argiudoll and a sandy loam Typic Hapludoll of the Argentine Pampas from 2005 to 2008. Sampling was carried out before and after grazing, and at different moments of the crop cycle including harvest event. Grazing winter residues and weeds did not lead to the expected compaction processes [e.g., in average BD difference between after grazing and before grazing was from -0.072 to +0.137Mgm-3 for both soils under grazing]. In general, physical soil conditions improved during winter, independently of grazing. This might be related to the intrinsic soil characteristics [organic matter content, moisture, clay content] or grazing system [stocking rate, duration of grazing period], which prevented soil physical damage, suggesting that recovery forces were greater than grazing stress. Cropping to maize and soybean showed similar value or improved soil physical properties respect to the after grazing [e.g., in average PR difference between before harvest and after grazing was from +409 to -2561kPa for both soils], acting as biotic a recovery factor. However, massive damage was harvest operation led to the highest soil deterioration [e.g., in average PR difference between before harvest and after harvest was 985kPa]. 
653 0 |a ZEA MAYS 
653 0 |a TEMPORAL ASSESSMENT 
653 0 |a STRUCTURAL INSTABILITY 
653 0 |a SOILS 
653 0 |a SOIL PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 
653 0 |a SOIL PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 
653 0 |a SOIL CHARACTERISTICS 
653 0 |a RECOVERY 
653 0 |a PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 
653 0 |a PENETRATION RESISTANCES 
653 0 |a ORGANIC MATTER CONTENT 
653 0 |a INFILTRATION 
653 0 |a HARVESTING 
653 0 |a HARVEST 
653 0 |a GRAZING CROP RESIDUES 
653 0 |a GLYCINE MAX 
653 0 |a DETERIORATION 
653 0 |a CROPS 
653 0 |a CROP RESIDUE 
653 0 |a COMPACTION 
653 0 |a BOS 
653 0 |a ANIMALIA 
653 0 |a AGRICULTURE 
653 0 |a AGRICULTURAL WASTES 
700 1 |9 7471  |a Alvarez, Carina Rosa 
700 1 |a Taboada, Miguel Angel  |9 9839 
773 |t Soil and Tillage Research  |g vol.153 (2015), p.86-94 
856 |u http://ri.agro.uba.ar/files/intranet/articulo/2015fernandez.pdf  |i En reservorio  |q application/pdf  |f 2015fernandez  |x MIGRADOS2018 
856 |u http://www.elsevier.com/  |x MIGRADOS2018  |z LINK AL EDITOR 
942 0 0 |c ARTICULO 
942 0 0 |c ENLINEA 
976 |a AAG