Comparative agroecological study of tillage methods

Authors

  • Krisztina Bádonyi Department for Physical Geography, Geographical Research Institute, HAS, H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45.
  • Gergely Hegyi Eötös Loránd University, 1117 Budapest, Pázmány P. sétány 1/C, Hungary
  • Szabolcs Benke Department for Physical Geography, Geographical Research Institute, HAS, H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45,
  • Balázs Madarász Department for Physical Geography, Geographical Research Institute, HAS, H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45
  • Ádám Kertész Department for Physical Geography, Geographical Research Institute, HAS, H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.4155

Keywords:

conventional tillage, conservation tillage, earthworms, birds

Abstract

In Hungary, 48.5% of the land is under agricultural crop production, so it is important to consider these areas also as habitats. In the SOWAP project – under the EU Life-Environment Programme and in cooperation with Syngenta – we tested whether conservation tillage (disk instead of plough, crop residues left on soil surface) is beneficial for earthworms and farmland birds in comparison to conventional tillage. These taxa are important bioindicators of good soil health and healthy countryside, respectively. The study site (Dióskál) is in a hilly agricultural region in Zala County, southwest of Lake Balaton. The experiment was carried out on 12 pairs of plots (12 conventional, 12 conservation, each between 3–5 ha in size, in total 107 ha), in maize-wheat crop rotation, between 2003–2005. Earthworms were sampled twice a year, and feeding birds were recorded weekly within two winter periods, along transects. Comparing to conventional tilled plots, the number of earthworms was significantly higher on the conservation tilled plots, and their weight was also significantly higher, in both years and in case of both crop rotations. Conservation tillage was beneficial during two winter periods, in both crop rotations, and principally so for seed eating small songbirds such as Skylark, Tree Sparrow, Brambling, Goldfinch, Greenfinch and Yellowhammer. At nearly all sampling dates (12 out of 15) of both winter periods there was a significant effect of tillage on the occurrence of small songbirds, for the benefit of conservation tillage. At species level tillage had a significant effect on 7 out of the 12 species that could be examined. All of these were recorded more frequently on the conservation tilled plots. In a smaller group of the species we also explored whether the number of birds by observations differed at the two tillage types. Pheasants, Skylarks and Tree Sparrows were detected in significantly greater numbers on the conservation plots. We conclude that using conservation instead of conventional tillage, besides protecting soil resources, may also promote biodiversity within an intensive agricultural system.

Author Biography

  • Krisztina Bádonyi, Department for Physical Geography, Geographical Research Institute, HAS, H-1112 Budapest, Budaörsi út 45.

    corresponding author
    Bad8379@iif.hu

References

Baldassarre G., Whyte R., Quinlan E., Bolen E. 1983: Dynamics and quality of waste corn available to post-breeding waterfowl in Texas. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 11: 25-31.

Bádonyi K. 2006: A hagyományos és a kímélő talajművelés hatása a talajerózióra és az élővilágra. Tájökológiai Lapok 4: 1-16.

Báldi A. 2005: Az agrár-környezetvédelmi programok ökológiai kutatásának szükségességéről. A Falu, 20: 61-65.

Birdlife International 2004: Birds in the European Union: a status assessment. BirdLife International, Wageningen, The Netherlands.

Birkás M., Jolánkai M., Gyuricza Cs., Percze A. 2004: Tillage effects on compaction, earthworms and other soil quality indicators in Hungary. Soil & Tillage Research 78: 185-196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2004.02.006

Bradbury R. B., Allen D. S. 2003: Evaluation of the impact of the pilot UK arable stewardship scheme on breeding and wintering birds. Bird Study 50: 131-141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063650309461304

Castrale J. S. 1985: Responses of wildlife to various tillage conditions. Trans. N. Am. Wildl. Nat. Resources Conf. 50: 142-156.

Cohen J. 1988: Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.

Cunningham H., Bradbury R., Chaney K., Wilcox A. 2005: Effect of non-inversion tillage on field usage by UK farmland birds in winter. Bird Study 52: 173-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063650509461388

Emmerling C. 2001: Response of earthworm communities to different types of soil tillage. Applied Soil Ecology 17: 91-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0929-1393(00)00132-3

Fülöp Gy., Szilvácsku Zs. (szerk.) 2000: Természetkímélő módszerek a mezőgazdaságban. Magyar Madártani és Természetvédelmi Egyesület, Eger.

Harper Adams University College 2003: Earthworm soil core standard operating procedure. Crop and Environment Research Centre, Newport, UK.

Holland J. M. 2004: The environmental consequences of adopting conservation tillage in Europe: reviewing the evidence. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 103: 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2003.12.018

Jakab G., Szalai Z. 2005: Barnaföld erózióérzékenységének vizsgálata esőztetéssel a Tetves-patak vízgyűjtőjén. Tájökológiai Lapok 3: 177-189.

Jakab G. 2006: A vonalas erózió megjelenési formái és mérésének lehetőségei. Tájökológiai Lapok 4: 17-33.

Marshall E. J. P., Brown V. K., Boatman N. D., Lutman P. J. W., Squire G. R., Ward L. K. 2003: The role of weeds in supporting biological diversity within crop fields. European Weed Research Society, Weed Research 43: 77-89. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-3180.2003.00326.x

Moorcroft D., Whittingham M. J., Bradbury R. B., Wilson J. D. 2002: Stubble field prescriptions for granivorous birds - The role of vegetation cover and food abundance. J. Appl. Ecol. 39: 535-547. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2002.00730.x

Perkins A. J., Whittingham M. J., Morris A. J., Barnett P. R., Wilson J. D., Bradbury R. B. 2000: Habitat characteristics affecting use of lowland agricultural grassland by birds. Biological Conservation 95: 279-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3207(00)00042-2

Sas Institute Inc. 1999: SAS System for Windows, Version 8.2. Cary, NC, USA.

Siriwardena G. M., Baillie S. R., Crick H. Q. P., Wilson J. D. 2000: The importance of variation in the breeding performance of seed-eating birds in determining their population trends on farmland. J. App. Ecol. 37: 128-148. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2664.2000.00484.x

Statsoft 2000: Statistica 5.5, Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Szabó M., Barczi A., Turcsányi G. 2001: A környezet állapota és használatának néhány szempontja Magyarországon. In: Ángyán J., Podmaniczky L., Szabó M., Vajnáné Madarassy A. (szerk.): Az Érzékeny Természeti Területek (ÉTT) rendszere. Tanulmányok Magyarország és az Európai Unió természetvédelméről. TEMPUS Institutional Building Joint European Project. ELTE-TTK, SZIE-KGI, KöM-TvH, Budapest-Gödöllő-Berlin-Madrid-Thessaloniki. pp. 19-87.

Wilson J. D., Taylor R., Muirhead L. B. 1996: Field use by farmland birds in winter: an analysis of field type preference using re-sampling methods. Bird Study 43: 320-332. https://doi.org/10.1080/00063659609461025

Zicsi A. 1960: Ökológiai, faunisztikai és rendszertani tanulmányok Magyarország földigiliszta faunáján. Kandidátusi értekezés. MTA Talajzoológiai Kutatócsoport, Budapest. p. 193.

Zicsi A. 1967: Die Auswirkung von Bodenbearbeitungsverfahren auf Zustand und Besatzdichte von einheimischen Regenwürmern. In: Graff, Satchell (eds.): Progress in Soil Biology. Braunschweig. pp. 290-298.

Published

2008-08-11

Issue

Section

Tanulmányok, eredeti közlemények

How to Cite

Comparative agroecological study of tillage methods. (2008). JOURNAL OF LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY | TÁJÖKOLÓGIAI LAPOK , 6(1-2), 145-163. https://doi.org/10.56617/tl.4155

Similar Articles

21-30 of 33

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.