Soil Water Depletion and Recharge under Ten Crop Species and Applications to the Principles of Dynamic Cropping Systems

Dynamic cropping systems principles require that farmers consider climatic, market, and ecological factors on an annual basis in making crop choices. Our objectives were to determine variability of seasonal soil water depletion (SWD) and spring soil water recharge (SWR) among crops and to apply results to dynamic cropping systems practice. A 10-species crop sequence project was conducted under notillage on silt loam Haplustoll soils in North Dakota. Mid-May to midSeptember SWD and following April SWR were determined from 2002 to 2005 by neutron moisture meter to the 1.8-m depth. Crops studied and average SWD amounts (cm) were: sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.), 13.5; corn (Zea mays L.), 12.6; sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench], 11.0; spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), 10.6; canola (Brassica napus L.), 10.0; millet (Panicum miliaceum L.), 9.6; buckwheat (Fagopyrum esculentum Moench), 9.4; chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.), 8.5; lentil (Lens culinaris Medik), 8.1; and dry pea (Pisum sativum L.), 5.0, with highest and lowest being 29 and 11% of average May soil water, 46 cm. Because the period of the experiment was relatively dry, recharge was less than depletion. Spring soil water was 10 cm greater following pea than following sunflower. Ranking of crops for water storage roughly followed reverse SWD rank, with several exceptions, notably wheat, which had greater water from snow capture. Lower soil water following crops such as sunflower and corn was linked to negative crop sequential effects in this project. Choosing to seed a lower water-using crop in the spring after the occurrence of below-average SWR on land that had a higher water-using crop the previous season illustrates an application of information reported here along with the principles of dynamic cropping systems.

[1]  J. D. Hanson,et al.  Crop Residue Coverage of Soil Influenced by Crop Sequence in a No‐Till System , 2007 .

[2]  Ofer Beeri,et al.  Remote wetland assessment for Missouri Coteau prairie glacial basins , 2005, Wetlands.

[3]  J. D. Hanson,et al.  Root Length Growth of Eight Crop Species in Haplustoll Soils , 2002 .

[4]  E. Noordman,et al.  SEBAL model with remotely sensed data to improve water-resources management under actual field conditions , 2005 .

[5]  S. D. Merrill,et al.  Dynamic cropping systems: an adaptable approach to crop production in the Great Plains , 2002 .

[6]  P. Miller,et al.  Cropping sequence affects wheat productivity on the semiarid northern Great Plains , 2002 .

[7]  Gary A. Peterson,et al.  Dryland cropping intensification: a fundamental solution to efficient use of precipitation , 1998 .

[8]  Ofer Beeri,et al.  Landscape estimation of canopy C:N ratios under variable drought stress in Northern Great Plains rangelands , 2006 .

[9]  C. Norwood.  Dryland winter wheat as affected by previous crops. , 2000 .

[10]  M. Liebig,et al.  Crop sequence effects of 10 crops in the northern Great Plains , 2006 .

[11]  A. L. Black,et al.  Dryland cropping strategies for efficient water-use to control saline seeps in the Northern Great Plains, U.S.A. , 1981 .

[12]  D. Tanaka,et al.  Yield and water use of broadleaf crops in a semiarid climate , 2003 .

[13]  D. Nielsen,et al.  Winter wheat and proso millet yield reduction due to sunflower in rotation , 1999 .

[14]  M. Liebig,et al.  Dynamic Cropping Systems for Sustainable Crop Production in the Northern Great Plains , 2007 .