soil compaction and tillage effects on soil physical properties of a mollic ochraqualf in northwest...

This article was downloaded by: [Akdeniz Universitesi]On: 20 December 2014, At: 17:23Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Sustainable AgriculturePublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjsa20

Soil Compaction and Tillage Effects on Soil PhysicalProperties of a Mollic Ochraqualf in Northwest OhioR. Lal aa School of Natural Resources, The Ohio State University , Columbus, OH, 43210Published online: 22 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: R. Lal (1999) Soil Compaction and Tillage Effects on Soil Physical Properties of a Mollic Ochraqualf inNorthwest Ohio, Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, 14:4, 53-65, DOI: 10.1300/J064v14n04_06

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J064v14n04_06

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wjsa20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J064v14n04_06

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J064v14n04_06

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Soil Compaction and Tillage Effectson Soil Physical Properties

of a Mollic Ochraqualf in Northwest OhioR. Lal

ABSTRACT. Soil compaction affects crop yields through alterationsof soil physical properties and processes. Effects of 3 tillage methodsand 3 compaction treatments on the physical properties of a clayey soilwere investigated in the lakebed region of northwestern Ohio. Tillagetreatments included no-till (NT), chisel plowing (CP), and moldboardplowing (MP). Compaction treatments were imposed for 3 consecutiveyears followed by 4 years without compaction. Compaction treatmentsinvolved control, 10 Mg, and 20 Mg axle load on single axis. Effects oftillage (as main plots) and axle load (as sub-plots) treatments wereevaluated for 2 crop rotations: a 3-year rotation involving corn (Zeamays)-soybean (Glycine max)-oats (Avena sativa) and a 2-year rotationinvolving corn-soybean. These experiments were initiated in fall 1987,and measurements of soil physical properties were made in 1992 and1993. Neither tillage nor compaction treatments had a significant effecton soil bulk density (Ãb), and mean Ãb measured in 1993 was 1.34 Mgm 3 for 0 to 10 cm depth and 1.39 Mg m 3 for 10 to 20 cm depth.Although not significantly different, trends in Ãb were NT > MP > CPfor 0 to 10 cm depth and NT > CP >MP for 10 to 20 cm depth. The dataon saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks) were highly variable and treat-ments had no effect. Moisture retention characteristics differed signifi-cantly among depths but not among treatments. The data highlight theneed for development of suitable indices for or to assess management-induced differences in physical properties of clayey soils characterizedby high swell-shrink capacity. [Article copies available for a fee from TheHaworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mail address:[email protected] <Website: http://www.haworthpressinc.com>]

KEYWORDS. Cereal, grains, intercropping, Nigeria, oil palm (Elaeisguineensis Jacq), sex-ratio, soil pH, soil nutrients, sustainable agriculture

R. Lal is affiliated with the School of Natural Resources, The Ohio State Univer-sity, Columbus, OH 43210.

Journal of Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 14(4) 1999E 1999 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 53

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

http://www.haworthpressinc.com

JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE54

INTRODUCTION

Soil compaction can impact crop yield drastically (Håkansson, 1994;Soane and Van Ouwerkerk, 1994). Therefore, understanding the impact ofsoil compaction on soil physical processes is important to developing sys-tems of sustainable management of soil and water resources in intensivemechanized agriculture. Although the processes leading to compaction ordecrease in soil volume are known and well understood (Koolen, 1994;Kooistra and Tovey, 1994), the impact of machine-soil interaction on soilstructure and its functional attributes is not. Machine traffic may drasticallyalter or degrade structural properties of both the surface and subsoil. Structur-al degradation may occur without significant increase in soil bulk density(Ãb) due to adverse effects on functional characteristics of pore space byaltering continuity or tortuosity and orientation, as is the case in puddling. Amajor impact of change in the functional characteristics of pore space isalterations in fluid dynamic properties of soil, e.g., gaseous diffusion, watertransmission, internal drainage, etc. With increase in soil Ãb, structural degra-dation leads to reduction in total and macroporosity, decrease in saturatedhydraulic conductivity (Ks), and increased risk of anaerobiosis. The magni-tude of soil compaction can be expressed by the relative increase in Ãb,comparative increase in Ãb of surface vs. sub-soil horizons, decrease in aera-tion porosity, and reduction in Ks.Among several indices for quantification of alterations in soil structure

due to machinery-soil interactions (Letey, 1985; Larson and Pierce, 1992;Lal, 1991; 1994; Perfect and Kay, 1994; and da Silva et al., 1994), mostcommonly used are bulk density, porosity and pore size distribution, soilstrength and infiltration rate. Use of these structural indices has been pro-posed by Soane (1985) and Soane and Boone (1986), because crop growthand yield responses are not necessarily direct and appropriate indices ofstructural degradation on heavy textured soils with high swell-shrink capacity(Raghavan and McKyes, 1983).The degree of change in structural characteristics depends on inherent

properties of the soil (e.g., texture, clay minerals, soil organic carbon [SOC]content, and aggregation), antecedent soil conditions (e.g., soil wetness at thetime of machine traffic, and prevalent weather conditions), and soil and cropmanagement systems. If all soil, machine, and weather factors are known, theeffects of machinery and traffic on soil properties may be generalizable(Håkansson et al., 1988). Soils containing high silt and fine sand contents,low soil organic matter content, and low water stable aggregates are easilyprone to structural degradation and increase in Ãb. Effects of compaction arerelated to clay content of the soil (Håkansson et al., 1987; Schjonning andRasmussen, 1994; Riley, 1994). In Quebec, Angers (1990) observed that thecompression index was correlated positively with clay and silt contents and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

Research, Reviews, Practices, Policy and Technology 55

negatively with sand and SOC contents. In comparison, Bauder et al. (1981)reported no significant effects of wheel traffic on soil Ãb during the 10th yearof a study conducted on an Aquic Hapludoll. Similarly, Lindstrom et al.(1981) observed no effects of wheel tracks on infiltration rate. In Ohio, Laland Tanaka (1992) observed no drastic effect of simulated harvest traffic oneither soil physical properties or crop response on a light-textured Ochraqu-alf. In comparison, machinery-induced structural degradation in heavy-tex-tured soils may cause drastic reductions in crop growth and yield (Lal, 1997).The objective of this experiment was to evaluate the impact of harvest

traffic axle load and tillage methods on structural and hydrological propertiesof a clayey soil in northwest Ohio. The specific objective was to assesstemporal changes in soil properties as influenced by wheel traffic, tillage, andtheir interaction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Soil physical properties were measured in an experiment conducted forseven consecutive years at the Northwestern Branch of the Ohio AgriculturalResearch and Development Center (OARDC) at Hoytville. These experi-ments were established in the fall of 1987 and the first crop was grown inspring of 1988. Experiments continued through the growing season of 1994,and have been described by Lal (1997).Soil at the experimental site is Hoytville series (fine, illitic, mesic Mollic

Ochraqualfs), derived from a fine-textured, calcareous glacial till. It is char-acterized by a dark-colored surface horizon of about 20 cm depth, very darkgray firm clay from 20 to 60 cm depth, and dark grayish-brown but very firmclay and mottled horizon from 60 to 100 cm depth (Lal et al., 1989). Particlesize distribution of the surface horizon comprises about 19% sand, 42% siltand 39% clay (silty clay loam). The soil has a high swell-shrink capacity, anddevelops deep and wide cracks on drying.A two-way (3 3) factorial treatment design was implemented in the

field in a split plot arrangement with 3 replications. The main plot factorincluded methods of seedbed preparation: no-till (NT), chisel plowing (CP)and moldboard plowing (MP). The subplot factor was compaction: controlwith no traffic of a grain cart, 10 Mg load on a single-axle grain cart, and 20Mg axle load on a single axle grain cart. The entire soil surface was coveredwith the grain cart traffic during the fall (November-December) soon afterharvesting the previous crop. This was achieved by repetitive adjacent passesas observed by tire tracks. The control treatment involved no grain carttraffic.After imposing the compaction treatments, all MP plots were plowed with

a moldboard plow to about 20 cm depth, and all CP plots were chiseled to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


about 30 cm depth. In the spring, disking and rotovation were performed inboth MP and CP treatments prior to sowing. Crops were sown through thecrop residue mulch of the previous season crop in the NT treatment (Lal,1996). Because of the small plot size and use of a 4-row seeder, crop rows insubsequent seasons were consistently located at approximately the same site.There were two crop rotations, a 3-year rotation and a 2-year rotation. The3-year rotation included maize-soybean-oats, and 2-year rotation includedmaize-soybean. The 2-year rotation was started as a 3-year rotation compris-ing maize-soybean-sugarbeet. Sugarbeet was grown during 1988 and 1989.Because of poor germination and low plant stand, however, sugarbeet wasdropped after 1989. Subsequently, maize-soybean were grown in a 2-yearrotation. All crops in each rotation were grown every year. Details of the soiland crop management practices are outlined in Lal (1997).Soil physical properties were measured three times during the seven year

period of the experimentation. Baseline assessment of soil physical proper-ties was made in summer 1988 soon after initiating the experiment. Subse-quent measurements were made in 1992 when compaction treatments werediscontinued. Measurements of soil physical properties in 1993 were aimedat assessing the residual effect of soil compaction in this soil and ecoregion.Soil Ãb was measured for 0 to 10 cm and 10 to 20 cm depths on soil cores

7.5 cm in diameter and 7.5 cm deep (Blake and Hartge, 1986). Two soil coresper treatment, one for each depth, were taken randomly in inter-rows. The Kson these cores was measured in the laboratory using a constant head permea-meter (Klute and Dirksen, 1986). Moisture release characteristics on coreswere determined using a combination of Tension Table (Clement, 1966) andPressure Plate Extractors (Klute, 1986; ASA, 1986). Data on soil moistureretention were reported both on gravimetric basis and volumetric basis, thelatter being obtained by multiplication with soil’s specific gravity. Waterstable aggregation (WSA) was assessed by the wet sieving method (Yoder,1936), and the results were expressed as mean weight diameter (MWD)(Youker andMcGuiness, 1956; Hillel, 1983). Penetration resistance (PR) wasmeasured for the surface soil using a Proving ring penetrometer. Results ofsoil properties were statistically analyzed according to split plot design (Steeland Torrie, 1980) using depth as a fixed variable.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Soil Bulk Density

Tillage and compaction treatments had no significant effect on soil Ãbmeasured in 1992 (Table 1) and 1993 (Table 2). Mean Ãb in 1992 was 1.42

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


TABLE 1. Compaction and tillage effects on soil bulk density for 0-10 cm and10-20 cm depths measured in summer 1992 at Hoytville for a 3-year rotation.

Axle 0-10 cm 10-20 cm Overall

Load (Mg) NT CP MP Mean NT CP MP Mean Mean

Mg m 3

0 1.43 1.46 1.43 1.44 1.42 1.43 1.44 1.44 1.4310 1.52 1.38 1.42 1.42 1.36 1.44 1.42 1.43 1.4220 1.45 1.44 1.42 1.41 1.37 1.36 1.42 1.38 1.40

Mean 1.47 1.41 1.43 1.38 1.41 1.42LSD (.05)

Compaction NSTillage NSDepth NST C NST D NSC D NS

TABLE 2. Compaction and tillage effects on soil bulk density for 0-10 cm and10-20 cm depths measured in fall 1993 at Hoytville in a 3-year rotation.



Mg m 3

0 1.37 1.31 1.29 1.32 1.42 1.36 1.37 1.38 1.3510 1.36 1.32 1.34 1.34 1.45 1.40 1.34 1.40 1.3720 1.38 1.31 1.36 1.35 1.41 1.40 1.36 1.39 1.37

Mean 1.37 1.31 1.33 1.43 1.39 1.36

LSD (.05)Tillage NS NSCompaction NS NST C NS NS

Mg m 3 for both depths. The mean Ãb was 1.34 Mg m 3 for 0 to 10 cmdepth and 1.39 Mg m 3 for 10 to 20 cm depth. There existed a tillagerotation effect on Ãb for 10 to 20 cm depth in the 2-year rotation and for 0 to10 cm depth in the 3 year rotation. The data in Table 3 show that the highestÃb was measured in CP for 10 to 20 cm depth in the 2-year rotation and for 0to 10 cm in the 3-year rotation. The least Ãb in both rotations was measuredfor the MP method. Soil Ãb data for this clayey soil of high swell-shrinkcapacity showed that compaction treatment did not cause a drastic increase inÃb of either 0 to 10 cm or 10 to 20 cm depths.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity

Measurements of Ks were made only in 1993. The Ks data were highlyvariable, consequently compaction treatments had no significant effect. Fortillage, CP resulted in the highest Ks (Table 4). Relative Ks in the order ofNT:CP:MP was 100:137.9:51.6 for 0 to 10 cm depth and 100:148.6:78.4 for10 to 20 cm depth. Considering average Ks for both depths, CP increased Ksby 42% compared with NT and by 127% compared with MP. TheMPmethodof seedbed preparation had the most detrimental affect on Ks.

Soil Moisture Retention Characteristics

Moisture retention at 0.03 MPa suction for 0 to 10 cm and 10 to 20 cmdepths measured in 1992 showed that none of the treatment variables had a

TABLE 3. Tillage and rotation effects on soil bulk density measured in fall 1993rotation.

Tillage 2-Year (10-20 cm) 3-Year (0-10 cm)

Mg m 3

NT 1.41 1.34CP 1.47 1.39MP 1.39 1.24LSD 0.05* 0.08**

* Significant at 5% level of probability** Significant at 1% level of probabilitySoil bulk density for other depths was not significantly different.

TABLE 4. Tillage effects on saturated hydraulic conductivity of 0-10 cm and10-20 cm depths measured in fall 1993 for 3-year rotation.

Depth

Tillage 0-10 cm 10-20 cm Mean

cm day 1

NT 15.3 11.1 13.2CP 21.1 16.5 18.8MP 7.9 8.7 8.3Mean 14.8 12.1

LSD (.05) NS 9.3*

* Significant at 5% level of probabilityNS = not significant

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


significant effect on moisture retention (Table 5). However, moisture reten-tion at 0.03 MPa suction differed significantly among depths being 27.3% for0 to 10 cm depth compared with 30.0% for 10 to 20 cm depth.There was a significant tillage depth interaction for soil moisture reten-

tion data at 1.5 MPa suction measured in 1992 (Table 6). With regards todepth, mean moisture retention at 1.5 MPa was 19.7% for 0 to 10 cm depthcompared with 20.0% for 10 to 20 cm depth. With regards to tillage in theorder NT:CP:MP, moisture retention at 1.5 MPa was 100:96.5:100 for 0 to 10cm depth compared with 100:112.2:105.3 for 10 to 20 cm depth, respectively.The data on available water capacity (AWC) in 1992, calculated as the

difference between moisture retention at 0.03 MPa and 1.5 MPa suctions,show that AWC also was not affected by any of the treatments (Table 7). TheAWC, however, differed significantly among depths, being 7.7% for 0 to 10cm depth compared with 10.0% for 10 to 20 cm depth.Compaction treatments had a significant effect on moisture retention at

0.03 MPa suction for 0 to 10 cm depth, and there was a significant tillagecompaction interaction (Table 8). The least moisture retention was observedfor the uncompacted control. The highest moisture retention was observedfor CP-10 Mg axle load treatment in both the 2-year and 3-year rotations. Incontrast, moisture retention at 1.5 MPa suction was significantly affected by

TABLE 5. Compaction and tillage effects on soil moisture retention at 0.03MPasuction for 0-10 cm and 10-20 cm depths measured in summer 1992 at Hoyt-ville.

Depth



% by weight

0 25.5 26.0 28.0 26.5 27.4 30.1 30.1 29.3 27.910 25.7 31.1 28.1 28.3 30.4 30.2 31.1 30.1 29.220 26.3 26.8 28.3 27.1 30.0 30.1 31.0 30.7 28.9

Mean 25.8 28.0 28.1 29.2 30.1 30.6

LSDCompaction NSTillage NSDepth 1.0***T C NST D NSC D NST C D NS

NS = not significant*** = significant at 0.1% level of probability

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


TABLE 6. Compaction and tillage effects on soil moisture retention at 1.5 MPasuction for 0-10 cm and 10-20 cm depths measured in summer 1992 at Hoyt-ville.

Depth



% by weight

0 20.0 19.0 19.7 19.6 15.9 21.9 23.5 20.4 19.910 18.0 19.6 20.3 19.3 20.0 23.1 15.6 19.6 19.520 21.8 18.9 19.6 20.1 20.7 18.7 20.7 20.0 20.1

Mean 19.9 19.2 19.9 18.9 21.2 19.9

LSDCompaction NSTillage NSDepth NST C NST D 1.0**C D NST C D NS

NS = not significant** = significant at 1% level of probability

TABLE 7. Compaction and tillage effects on available water capacity for 0-10cm and 10-20 cm depths measured in summer 1992 at Hoytville.

Depth



% by weight

0 5.6 7.1 8.3 7.0 11.6 8.6 6.4 8.9 7.910 7.7 11.5 7.8 9.0 10.1 7.1 14.5 10.6 9.820 4.5 7.9 8.7 7.1 9.5 12.4 10.3 10.7 8.9

Mean 5.9 8.8 8.3 10.3 9.4 10.4

LSDCompaction NSTillage NSDepth 2.0**T C NST D NSC D NST C D NS


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


TABLE 8. Compaction, rotation, and tillage effects on soil moisture retention at0.03 MPa suction for 0-10 cm depth measured in fall 1993.

Rotation

Axle 2-Year 3-Year Overall


% by weight

0 24.3 28.3 29.0 27.2 28.3 28.7 27.7 28.2 27.710 32.0 25.7 29.3 29.0 32.0 29.3 31.3 30.9 29.920 27.0 30.7 25.3 27.7 27.3 31.0 28.7 29.0 28.3

Mean 27.8 28.2 27.9 29.2 29.7 29.2

LSDRotation NSTillage NSCompaction 2.0**R T NSR C NST C 1.0***R T C NS

NS = not significant** = significant at 1% level of probability*** = significant at 0.1% level of probability

tillage and a rotation compaction interaction (Table 9). The highest moistureretention at 1.5 MPa suction was observed with NT method in both rotations.With regards to tillage methods in the order NT:CP:MP, relative moistureretention at 1.5 MPa suction was 100:94.2:95.8 for 2-year rotation comparedwith 100:86.3:91.1 for 3-year rotation. The data on AWC for 0 to 10 cm depthshowed significant effect of tillage methods and tillage compaction interac-tion (Table 10). The highest AWC was also observed for the CP-10 Mg axleload treatment for both rotations. With regards to tillage methods in the orderNT:CP:MP, AWC was 100:119.5:111.5 for 2-year rotation compared with100:139.1:117.2 for 3-year rotation. The data on AWC for 10 to 20 cm depthshowed significant effect only of the tillage compaction interaction (datanot presented). The highest AWC of 16.3% was observed for the NT-20 Mgaxle load treatment. With regards to tillage methods in the order NT:CP:MP,the relative AWC for 10 to 20 cm depth was 100:94.9:94.9 (data not shown).

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

The data on physical properties have important implications with regard tochoosing an appropriate criterion or index to assess tillage and compactioneffects on structural characteristics of a clayey soil.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


TABLE 9. Compaction, rotation, and tillage effects on soil moisture retention at1.5 MPa suction for 0-10 cm depth measured in fall 1993.



% by weight

0 20.3 18.7 19.3 19.4 17.7 15.3 18.7 17.2 18.310 16.7 17.3 17.7 17.6 22.3 19.3 18.0 19.9 18.720 19.3 18.7 16.7 18.1 21.3 18.0 19.0 19.4 18.8

Mean 19.0 17.9 18.2 20.4 17.6 18.6

LSDRotation NSTillage 1.0**Compaction NSR T NSR C 4.0*T C NSR T C NS

NS = not significant** = significant at 5% level of probability*** = significant at 1%

TABLE10.Compaction, rotation, and tillage effects on available water capacityfor 0-10 cm depth measured in fall 1993.



% by weight

0 4.0 9.7 9.7 7.7 10.3 13.3 9.0 10.9 9.310 15.3 8.3 10.7 11.4 10.0 9.3 12.7 10.7 11.120 7.0 13.3 8.7 9.6 6.0 13.7 9.0 9.6 9.6

Mean 8.7 10.4 9.7 8.7 12.1 10.2

LSDRotation NSTillage 2.0**Compaction NSR T NSR C NST C 2.0**


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


Bulk density: Neither compaction nor tillage treatments had drastic effectson Ãb. The Ãb of such structurally-active soils may be influenced more byswell-shrink properties, freeze-thaw cycles, and soil biodiversity than bycompaction or tillage treatments. Soil Ãb, therefore, may not be an appropri-ate index of structural attributes of such soils. Changes in soil visible struc-ture in the field were not reflected in soil Ãb in this soil that develops large,deep and extensive cracks. These changes included formation of clods, in-tense crusting, inundation after rain etc.Aggregation: These soils were strongly aggregated. However, it is difficult

to assess the degree of aggregation by the conventional wet sieving techniquebecause aggregates stick to the sieve and are not sorted according to their size(data not shown). Therefore, total aggregation and the MWD as determinedby the wet sieving technique were not reliable indices of management-in-duced differences in structural characteristis of these soils. Perhaps a single-sieve rather than a multiple-sieve method may be a better alternative.Hydraulic conductivity: The Ks determined on small cores is not a true

measure of the water transmission properties of these soils characterized byhigh swell-shrink capacity. Laboratory determined Ks on cores is highlyvariable and technique-dependent. Water runs down along the core walls insome cases and smearing caused by sampling influences water flow in others.Moisture retention characteristics: Laboratory measured soil moisture reten-

tion characteristics have the same limitations as the hydraulic conductivitymeasured on small cores. Rather than absolute quantity of soil moistureretained, the differential moisture capacity (d� /d�) may be a better measureof the structural properties. The data in Table 11 are such an example of thedifferential moisture capacity of 10 to 20 cm depth. The data are averages ofall replications and treatments because there were no significant treatmentseffects nor interaction for soil moisture retention.The data presented indicate the need for development of an appropriate

TABLE 11. Differential soil moisture characteristics of 10-20 cm depth (meanof all replications and treatments).

Moisture Retention

Suction (cm) By Weight By Volume

----%---- --%/cm-- ----%---- --%/cm--

0 36.0 50.910 35.1 0.09 49.5 0.0630 33.7 0.07 47.4 0.1160 32.8 0.03 46.0 0.05100 31.0 0.05 43.7 0.06

None of the treatments had a statistically significant effect.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


index or indices to assess management-induced changes in properties ofclayey soils characterized by high swell-shrink capacity. Although measure-ments of gaseous exchange were not done, oxygen diffusion rate may be anappropriate index. Assessment of gaseous flux, e.g., CO2, CH4 or N2O mayalso provide a useful measure of predominant processes influenced by soiland crop management systems (Lal et al., 1995). Another promising optionmay be assessment of the non-limiting water range (Letey, 1985) or the leastlimiting water range (da Ailva et al., 1994).

REFERENCES

Angers, D.A., 1990. Compression of agricultural soils from Quebec. Soil and TillageRes. 18: 357-365.

ASA, 1986. Methods of Soil Analysis. Part I. Physical and Mineralogical Methods.ASA Mongograph 9, American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI, 1188 pp.

Bauder, J.W., Randall, G.W. and Swan, J.B., 1981. Effects of four continuous tillagesystems on mechanical impedance of a clay loam soil. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45:802-806.

Blake, G.R. and Hartge, K.H., 1986. Bulk density. In A. Klute (ed) ‘‘Methods of SoilAnalysis Part I, Physical and Mineralogical Methods,’’ 2nd edition, ASA-SSSAMonograph 9, Madison, WI: 363-376.

Clement, C.R., 1966. A simple and reliable tension table. J. Soil Sci. 17: 133-135.da Silva, A.P., Kay, B.D. and Perfect, E., 1994. Characterization of the least limiting

water range of soils. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58: 1775-1781.Håkansson, I., 1994. Subsoil compaction caused by heavy vehicles–a long-term

threat to soil productivity. Soil Tillage Res. 29: 105-110.Håkansson, I., Voorhees, W.B., Elonen, P., Raghavan, G.S.V., Lowery, B., Van Weijk,

A.L.H., Rasmussen, K.J. and Riley, H., 1987. Effect of high axle-load traffic onsubsoil compaction and crop yield in humid regions with annual freezing. SoilTillage Res. 10: 259-268.

Håkansson, I., Voorhees, W.B. and Riley, H., 1988. Vehicle and wheel factors in-fluencing soil compaction and crop response in different traffic regimes. Soil andTillage Res. 11:239-282.

Hillel, D., 1983. Introduction to Soil Physics, Academic Press, New York, 364 pp.Klute, A., 1986. Water retention: Laboratory methods. In A. Klute (ed) ‘‘Methods of

Soil Analysis, Part I, Physical and Mineralogical Methods,’’ 2nd edition, ASA-SSSA Monograph 9, Madison, WI: 635-661.

Klute, A. and Dirksen, C., 1986. Hydraulic conductivity and diffusivity: Laboratorymethods. In: A. Klute (ed) ‘‘Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I, Physical andMineralogical Methods,’’ 2nd edition, ASA-SSSA Monograph 9, Madison, WI:687-733.

Kooistra, M.J. and Tovey, N.K., 1994. Effects of compaction on soil microstructure.In B.D. Soane and C. Van Ouweikeik (eds) ‘‘Soil Compaction in Crop Produc-tion,’’ Elsevier, Amsterdam: 91-112.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014


Koolen, A.J., 1994. Mechanics of soil compaction. In B.D. Soane and C. Van Ouwer-kerk (eds) ‘‘Soil Compaction in Crop Production,’’ Elsevier, Amsterdam: 23-44.

Lal, R., 1991. Soil structure and sustainability. J. Sustainable Agric. 1(4): 67-92.Lal, R., 1994. Methods and guidelines for assessing sustainable use of soil and water

resources in the tropics. SMSS Technical Monograph 21, Washington, DC, 78 pp.Lal, R., 1996. Axle load and tillage effects on crop yields on a Mollic Ochraqualf in

Northwest Ohio. Soil & Tillage Res. 37: 143-160.Lal, R., Logan, T.J. and Fausey, N.R., 1989. Long-term tillage and wheel traffic

effects on a poorly drained Mollic Ochraqualf in Northwest Ohio. I. Soil physicalproperties, root distribution and grain yield of corn and soybean. Soil Tillage Res.14: 341-358.

Lal, R., and Tanaka, H., 1992. Simulated harvest traffic effects on corn, oats andsoybean yields in western Ohio. Soil and Tillage Res. 24: 65-78.

Larson, W.E. and Pierce, F.J., 1992. Conservation and enhancement of soil quality. In‘‘Evaluation for Sustainable Land Management in the Developing World.’’ IBS-RAM Proc. 12, Bangkok, Thailand.

Letey, J., 1985. Relationship between soil physical properties and crop production.Adv. Soil Sci. I: 277-294.

Lindstrom, M.J., Voorhees, W.B. and Randall, G.W., 1981. Longterm tillage effectson interow runoff and infiltration. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 45: 945-948.

McIntosh, M.S., 1983. Analysis of combined experiments. Agron. J. 75: 153-155.Perfect, E. and Kay, B.D., 1994. Statistical characterization of dry aggregate strength

using rupture energy. Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J. 58: 1804-1809.Raghavan, G.S.V., and McKyes, E., 1983. Physical and hydraulic characteristics in

compacted clay soils. J. Terremechanics 19: 235-242.Riley, H., 1994. The effect of traffic at high axle load on crop yields on a loam soil in

Norway. Soil Tillage Res. 29: 211-214.Schjonning, P. and Rasmussen, K.J., 1994. Danish experiments on subsoil compac-

tion by vehicles with high axle load. Soil Tillage Res. 29: 215-227.Soane, B.D., 1985. Traction and transport system as related to cropping systems. Int.

Conf. Soil Dynamics Proc. 5: 863-935.Soane, B.D. and Boone, F.R., 1986. The effects of tillage and traffic on soil structure.

Soil and Tillage Res. 8: 303-306.Soane, B.D. and Van Ouwerkerk, C., 1994. Soil compaction problem in world agri-

culture. In: B.D. Soane and C. Van Ouwerkerk (eds) ‘‘Soil Compaction in CropProduction.’’ Elsevier, Amsterdam, Holland: 1-21.

Steel, R.G. and Torrie, J.H., 1980. Principles and Procedures of Statistics, 2nd edi-tion, McGraw Hill, N.Y.

Yoder, R.E., 1936. A direct method of aggregate analysis and a study of the physicalnature of erosion losses. J. Am. Soc. Agron. 28: 337-351.

Youker, R.E., and McGuiness, J.L., 1956. A short method of obtaining mean-weightdiameter value of aggregate analysis. Soil Sci. 83: 291-294.

RECEIVED: 06/03/98REVISED: 11/05/98

ACCEPTED: 11/20/98

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Akd

eniz

Uni

vers

itesi

] at

17:

23 2

0 D

ecem

ber

2014

soil compaction and tillage effects on soil physical properties of a mollic ochraqualf in northwest...

Documents