Abstract
Abstract Cropping systems have a strong influence on soil structural characteristics, including aggregate stability. An experiment combining compost (Co) and mineral fertilizer inputs with different tillage frequencies was conducted in a cotton–maize rotation system on two soil types (Lixisol and Luvisol) in Burkina Faso. The objective was to investigate an alternative soil fertility management regime that protects soil structure for cotton and maize production. We tested the hypothesis that organic fertilizer applications and reduced ploughing frequency can improve aggregate stability. The effects of reduced tillage (RT; ox‐ploughing/hand hoe scarifying the next year) and annual ox‐ploughing (AP) combined with Co and no compost (nCo) applications on the stability of soil aggregates subjected to wet sieving, were assessed. In the second year of the experiment (maize), the macroaggregate stability in the RT plots was 87% higher than in the AP plots on the Lixisol, 26% higher on the Luvisol. In the third year (cotton) the difference in treatment effects was less. The treatments influenced macroaggregate stability in the year of scarification, and the microaggregate stability in the year they were ploughed. We concluded that a soil management regime, with ploughing only every second year and with compost as well as mineral fertilizer inputs, is appropriate to replace the common practice of annual ploughing with application of mineral fertilizers in this cotton–maize cropping system.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 6
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage increased macroaggregate stability on Lixisol in the maize year by 87% relative to annual ploughing.
- Treatment
- RT plotse0
- Outcome
- macroaggregate stabilitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 87%e0
- Comparator
- AP plotse0
- Setting
- Lixisole0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the second year of the experiment (maize), the macroaggregate stability in the RT plots was 87% higher than in the AP plots on the Lixisol”
t0“cotton–maize ( Gossypium hirsutum‐Zea mays ) rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage increased macroaggregate stability on Luvisol in the maize year by 26% relative to annual ploughing.
- Treatment
- RT plotse0
- Outcome
- macroaggregate stabilitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 26%e0
- Comparator
- AP plotse0
- Setting
- Luvisole0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the second year of the experiment (maize), the macroaggregate stability in the RT plots was 87% higher than in the AP plots on the Lixisol, 26% higher on the Luvisol”
t0“cotton–maize ( Gossypium hirsutum‐Zea mays ) rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
The tillage treatment difference was smaller in the cotton year.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Outcome
- difference in treatment effectse0
- Direction
- lesse0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the third year (cotton) the difference in treatment effects was less”
t0“cotton–maize ( Gossypium hirsutum‐Zea mays ) rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatments influenced macroaggregate stability in the scarification year.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treatments influenced macroaggregate stability in the year of scarification”
t0“cotton–maize ( Gossypium hirsutum‐Zea mays ) rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatments influenced microaggregate stability in the ploughed year.
- Taxon
- Gossypium hirsutumGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- treatmentse1
- Outcome
- microaggregate stabilitye0
- Qualifier
- year they were ploughede0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the microaggregate stability in the year they were ploughed”
t0“cotton–maize ( Gossypium hirsutum‐Zea mays ) rotation”
e1“The treatments influenced macroaggregate stability in the year of scarification, and the microaggregate stability in the year they were ploughed”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend ploughing every second year with compost and mineral fertilizer instead of annual ploughing with mineral fertilizer.
- Taxon
- cotton–maizeGossypium hirsutum
Zea mayse0 - Outcome
- ploughing only every second year and with compost as well as mineral fertilizer inputse0
- Comparator
- annual ploughing with application of mineral fertilizerse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ploughing only every second year and with compost as well as mineral fertilizer inputs, is appropriate to replace the common practice of annual ploughing with application of mineral fertilizers in this cotton–maize cropping system”