Abstract
For sustainable crop production and maintenance of soil health, conservation agriculture (CA) practices provides an opportunity for improving soil structure and physical health, nutrient and water use efficiency, soil organic carbon and mitigation of greenhouse gases emission from agriculture. CA is primarily based on four crop management practices such as minimum soil disturbance or no-tillage; permanent or semi-permanent retention of crop residue; crop rotation and control traffic. Different CA management practices affect crop yield as well as soil properties. CA makes necessary modifications in different soil hydro-physical properties, viz. increase in soil water infiltration, reduction in water runoff and soil loss, and reduction in evaporation loss. No tillage (NT), residue retention and crop rotation combined effect the soil organic carbon concentration. Different crop rotations and residue retentions and crops with different rooting depths used in CA practices have proved to reduce the compaction constraints.CA can help to mitigate GHG emissions, viz methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from agriculture by improving soil C sequestration, enhancing soil quality, nitrogen and water use efficiencies, and decreasing fuel consumption. But effect of CA and conventional agricultural practices of porosity and pore size distribution is very much limited. When CA is practiced for six to ten years there is improvement in soil structure, porosity and pore size distribution, macro-micro faunal activity, and organic matter content..The soil under ZT has the lowest porosity as compared to conventional management practices. The highest porosity and the maximum connected pores are frequently seen in conventionally tilled soil. In this paper, an attempt has been made to review the variation of porosity and pore size distribution and other soil physical properties under conservation agricultural practices.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture practices affect crop yield.
Verbatim
e0“Different CA management practices affect crop yield as well as soil properties”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture increases soil water infiltration.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“increase in soil water infiltration”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture reduces water runoff and soil loss.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“reduction in water runoff and soil loss”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture reduces evaporation loss.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“reduction in evaporation loss”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture practices can reduce soil compaction constraints.
Verbatim
e0“Different crop rotations and residue retentions and crops with different rooting depths used in CA practices have proved to reduce the compaction constraints”
Claim · model-written summary
Six to ten years of conservation agriculture improves soil structure, porosity and pore size distribution.
- Outcome
- soil structure, porosity and pore size distributione0
- Direction
- improvemente0
- Qualifier
- six to ten yearse0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“When CA is practiced for six to ten years there is improvement in soil structure, porosity and pore size distribution”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage soil has the lowest porosity relative to conventional management.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“The soil under ZT has the lowest porosity as compared to conventional management practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventionally tilled soil frequently has the highest porosity and maximum connected pores.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“The highest porosity and the maximum connected pores are frequently seen in conventionally tilled soil”