IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agiwat/v150y2015icp46-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How much do sod-based rotations reduce nitrate leaching in a cereal cropping system?

Author

Listed:
  • Kunrath, Taise Robinson
  • de Berranger, Christophe
  • Charrier, Xavier
  • Gastal, François
  • de Faccio Carvalho, Paulo César
  • Lemaire, Gilles
  • Emile, Jean-Claude
  • Durand, Jean-Louis

Abstract

Nitrogen is essential to improving agricultural production systems, explaining why the contamination of groundwater by this nutrient is widespread. The aim of this paper was to describe data collected over 9 years on estimated leaching levels using a simple computation procedure and measurements of soil water content and water balance, nitrate concentrations in drainage water and meteorological data, and to assess the impacts of the duration of the grassland phase and the level of nitrogen fertilization on grassland on the drainage water quality. The study was carried out at a site of the Long-term Environmental Research Observation and Experimentation facility (SOERE) for Environmental Research- Agro-ecosystems, Biogeochemical Cycles and Biodiversity, run by the INRA experimental unit of Lusignan. The experimental treatments were sequences of maize, wheat and barley with different grassland rotational periods (a pure arable crop rotation; three or six years of grassland receiving high-level nitrogen applications; six years of grassland with a low N application rate and long-term grassland with nitrogen application). The study covered the period from April 2005 to June 2013, during which most drainage occurred in the autumn and early winter. Treatments with the longest duration of grassland exhibited less drainage than those containing a higher proportion of arable crops. The average nitrate concentration was 52.7±38.63mgNO3L−1 under a pure crop rotation, compared to 14.9±14.76mgNO3L−1 under a permanent grassland treatment. There were significant differences (P<0.0001) in cumulative nitrogen leaching between the different cropping systems, ranging from 9 to 37kgNha−1year−1. The introduction of mowed grassland sequences into this arable crop rotation caused a marked reduction in the nitrate levels in groundwater, and the greater the proportion of grassland within the rotation the more markedly was the NO3− concentration reduced, whatever the level of N fertilization during the grassland sequence.

Suggested Citation

  • Kunrath, Taise Robinson & de Berranger, Christophe & Charrier, Xavier & Gastal, François & de Faccio Carvalho, Paulo César & Lemaire, Gilles & Emile, Jean-Claude & Durand, Jean-Louis, 2015. "How much do sod-based rotations reduce nitrate leaching in a cereal cropping system?," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 46-56.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:150:y:2015:i:c:p:46-56
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2014.11.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037837741400376X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agwat.2014.11.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jégo, G. & Sánchez-Pérez, J.M. & Justes, E., 2012. "Predicting soil water and mineral nitrogen contents with the STICS model for estimating nitrate leaching under agricultural fields," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 54-65.
    2. Kaspar, T.C. & Jaynes, D.B. & Parkin, T.B. & Moorman, T.B. & Singer, J.W., 2012. "Effectiveness of oat and rye cover crops in reducing nitrate losses in drainage water," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 25-33.
    3. David Tilman & Kenneth G. Cassman & Pamela A. Matson & Rosamond Naylor & Stephen Polasky, 2002. "Agricultural sustainability and intensive production practices," Nature, Nature, vol. 418(6898), pages 671-677, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Homayounfar, Mehran & Muneepeerakul, Rachata & Martinez, Christopher J., 2023. "Navigating farming-BMP-policy interplay through a dynamical model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Elisa Morri & Riccardo Santolini, 2021. "Ecosystem Services Valuation for the Sustainable Land Use Management by Nature-Based Solution (NbS) in the Common Agricultural Policy Actions: A Case Study on the Foglia River Basin (Marche Region, It," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-23, December.
    2. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Shen Yuan & Shaobing Peng, 2017. "Exploring the Trends in Nitrogen Input and Nitrogen Use Efficiency for Agricultural Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Katarina Arvidsson Segerkvist & Helena Hansson & Ulf Sonesson & Stefan Gunnarsson, 2021. "A Systematic Mapping of Current Literature on Sustainability at Farm-Level in Beef and Lamb Meat Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-14, February.
    5. Vainio, Annukka & Tienhaara, Annika & Haltia, Emmi & Hyvönen, Terho & Pyysiäinen, Jarkko & Pouta, Eija, 2021. "The legitimacy of result-oriented and action-oriented agri-environmental schemes: A comparison of farmers’ and citizens’ perceptions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Hualin Xie & Yingqian Huang & Qianru Chen & Yanwei Zhang & Qing Wu, 2019. "Prospects for Agricultural Sustainable Intensification: A Review of Research," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-27, October.
    7. Smith, Helen F. & Sullivan, Caroline A., 2014. "Ecosystem services within agricultural landscapes—Farmers' perceptions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 72-80.
    8. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    9. Diriba Shiferaw G., 2017. "Water-Nutrients Interaction: Exploring the Effects of Water as a Central Role for Availability & Use Efficiency of Nutrients by Shallow Rooted Vegetable Crops - A Review," Journal of Agriculture and Crops, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 3(10), pages 78-93, 10-2017.
    10. Sheng Gong & Jason.S. Bergtold & Elizabeth Yeager, 2021. "Assessing the joint adoption and complementarity between in-field conservation practices of Kansas farmers," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 9(1), pages 1-24, December.
    11. Seufert, Verena & Ramankutty, Navin & Mayerhofer, Tabea, 2017. "What is this thing called organic? – How organic farming is codified in regulations," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 10-20.
    12. Jónsson, Jón Örvar G. & Davíðsdóttir, Brynhildur & Nikolaidis, Nikolaos P. & Giannakis, Georgios V., 2019. "Tools for Sustainable Soil Management: Soil Ecosystem Services, EROI and Economic Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 109-119.
    13. Kataki, Sampriti & West, Helen & Clarke, Michèle & Baruah, D.C., 2016. "Phosphorus recovery as struvite: Recent concerns for use of seed, alternative Mg source, nitrogen conservation and fertilizer potential," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 142-156.
    14. Ashley E. Larsen & Steven D. Gaines & Olivier Deschênes, 2017. "Agricultural pesticide use and adverse birth outcomes in the San Joaquin Valley of California," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-9, December.
    15. Carpentier, A. & Reboud, X., 2018. "Why farmers consider pesticides the ultimate in crop protection: economic and behavioral insights," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277528, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. Tiziano Gomiero, 2016. "Soil Degradation, Land Scarcity and Food Security: Reviewing a Complex Challenge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-41, March.
    17. Alexander D. Chapman & Stephen E. Darby & Hoàng M. Hồng & Emma L. Tompkins & Tri P. D. Van, 2016. "Adaptation and development trade-offs: fluvial sediment deposition and the sustainability of rice-cropping in An Giang Province, Mekong Delta," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 137(3), pages 593-608, August.
    18. Rosa, R.D. & Ramos, T.B. & Pereira, L.S., 2016. "The dual Kc approach to assess maize and sweet sorghum transpiration and soil evaporation under saline conditions: Application of the SIMDualKc model," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 77-94.
    19. Hristov, Jordan & Clough, Yann & Sahlin, Ullrika & Smith, Henrik G. & Stjernman, Martin & Olsson, Ola & Sahrbacher, Amanda & Brady, Mark V., 2020. "Impacts of the EU's Common Agricultural Policy “Greening” reform on agricultural development, biodiversity, and ecosystem services," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 42(4), pages 716-738.
    20. Xiaolei Geng & Dou Zhang & Chengwei Li & Yanyao Li & Jingling Huang & Xiangrong Wang, 2020. "Application and Comparison of Multiple Models on Agricultural Sustainability Assessments: A Case Study of the Yangtze River Delta Urban Agglomeration, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agiwat:v:150:y:2015:i:c:p:46-56. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agwat .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.