IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jagris/v15y2025i4p366-d1586883.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Earthworm Population Response to Simplified Tillage and Shortened Crop Rotations in a Central Lithuanian Cambisol: A Five-Year Study

Author

Listed:
  • Vytautas Seibutis

    (Department of Soil and Crop Management, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, LT-58344 Akademija, Kėdainiai Distr., Lithuania)

  • Kęstutis Tamošiūnas

    (Department of Plant Pathology and Protection, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, LT-58344 Akademija, Kėdainiai Distr., Lithuania)

  • Irena Deveikytė

    (Department of Soil and Crop Management, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, LT-58344 Akademija, Kėdainiai Distr., Lithuania)

  • Gražina Kadžienė

    (Department of Soil and Crop Management, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, LT-58344 Akademija, Kėdainiai Distr., Lithuania)

  • Roma Semaškienė

    (Department of Plant Pathology and Protection, Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry, LT-58344 Akademija, Kėdainiai Distr., Lithuania)

Abstract

This five-year study examined the impact of simplified tillage practices and shortened crop rotations on soil physical attributes and earthworm populations as an important indicator of soil health in Central Lithuanian Cambisols. The experiment was set up following a split-plot design to compare conventional tillage and no-tillage systems across three rotation schemes (three-field, two-field, and monoculture). The experiment was carried out over a period of 5 years, from 2010 to 2014. Preliminary soil conditions revealed notable disparities in moisture content across tillage methods (20.0 ± 0.3% against 17.9 ± 0.3% at a depth of 5–10 cm; p < 0.001), although variations in bulk density were more evident in the deeper soil layer (1.42 ± 0.02 versus 1.47 ± 0.01 mg m −3 at 15–20 cm). Earthworm abundance exhibited a strong negative association with bulk density (r = −0.612, p = 0.041) and a positive correlation with total porosity (r = 0.583, p = 0.044) in the upper soil layer. Notably, this study revealed the unexpected resilience of earthworm populations to tillage practices, with no significant differences between conventional and no-till systems (F 1,108 = 1.414, p = 0.237). Rotation effects showed more significance than tillage intensity, as both two-field and three-field rotations sustained comparable earthworm populations (127.5–131.2 ind. m −2 , 32.8–35.4 g m −2 ), but monoculture exhibited markedly lower figures (105.0 ± 13.2 ind. m −2 , 25.6 ± 2.7 g m −2 ; p < 0.048). Three-way ANOVA indicated substantial temporal effects (F 4,108 = 17.227, p < 0.001), demonstrating that environmental influences gained prominence as systems evolved. These findings challenge traditional assumptions about tillage impacts on soil fauna and indicate that crop diversification within the rotation cycle, rather than tillage intensity or rotation duration, is the essential determinant for sustaining earthworm populations in agricultural systems. Soil structural factors proved to be a significant factor but played a less substantial role.

Suggested Citation

  • Vytautas Seibutis & Kęstutis Tamošiūnas & Irena Deveikytė & Gražina Kadžienė & Roma Semaškienė, 2025. "Earthworm Population Response to Simplified Tillage and Shortened Crop Rotations in a Central Lithuanian Cambisol: A Five-Year Study," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:4:p:366-:d:1586883
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/4/366/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0472/15/4/366/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:gam:jagris:v:15:y:2025:i:4:p:366-:d:1586883. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.