Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T03:16:09.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Studies in soil cultivation: X. The results of a six-year cultivation experiment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

E. W. Russell
Affiliation:
Soil Physics Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts
B. A. Keen
Affiliation:
Soil Physics Department, Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden, Herts

Extract

1. The results of a six-year cultivation rotation experiment are given. The rotation used was wheat-mangolds-barley and the seed-beds for these were prepared either by ploughing, using a rotary cultivator or a tractor-drawn grubber.

2. The yields of these crops were barely influenced by the depth of ploughing, a 4 in. depth giving throughout the six years just about the same yield as an 8 in. depth. The mangold crop was possibly a little larger on the deeper ploughed plots.

3. The mean yields of the seed-beds prepared with the tractor drawn grubber or cultivator followed by harrows etc. were lower than the ploughed seed-beds for all the crops, and this was particularly so on those seed-beds prepared by only one grubbing down to 4 in. depth.

4. The mean yields on the seed-beds prepared by the rototiller were lower than on the ploughed seed-beds for wheat and mangolds. If the seed-bed was prepared by rototillage to a depth of 8 in. by going over the land twice, the yield of barley was the same as on the ploughed seed-beds, but was definitely less on the seed-bed rototilled only once to 4 in.

5. Seed-beds prepared by the rototiller or grubber have only a small residual effect on the crop yields in the following year.

6. It is concluded that the primary function of ploughing is weed control, and that it is only advisable to omit ploughing either if the land is already fairly clean or if the crop will be hoed very early on in its development.

7. For wheat and mangolds differences in weed infestation of the seed-bed were probably of greater importance than differences in tilth in so far as the crop yield was concerned. The reverse may have been true for barley.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1941

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

Blackman, G. E. & Templeman, W. G. (1938). J. agric. Sci. 28, 247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brenchley, W. E. (1929). Ann. Bot., Lond., 43, 89.Google Scholar
Cochran, W. G. (1939). J. R. Statist. Soc. Suppl. 6, 104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, E. W. & Keen, B. A. (1938). J. agric. Sci. 28, 212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Russell, E. W. & Mehta, N. P. (1938). J. agric. Sci. 28, 272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watson, D. J. (1939). J. agric. Sci. 29, 379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar