Abstract
Abstract Conservation tillage can reduce soil erosion, increase soil health, and decrease labor and fuel input costs. Despite these benefits, potential yield impacts remain an important concern for farmers considering adoption. Previous research suggests that conservation tillage is likely to have the largest yield benefits in more arid conditions, but a lack of field-level analyses across climatic, management and soil conditions limits confidence in such predictions. Satellite imagery provides the opportunity to monitor agricultural lands at sub-field resolution across large spatial scales and wide environmental gradients. Here we investigate the maize yield impacts of conservation tillage in the semi-arid western US Corn Belt, using sub-field resolution datasets on tillage practices and crop yields derived from satellite data spanning four states (Nebraska, Kansas, South Dakota, and North Dakota) between 2008 and 2020. On these datasets, we estimate heterogenous yield outcomes for several thousand maize fields across gradients in climate, soil quality and irrigation status by using a causal forests analysis, an adaptation of the random forests machine-learning algorithm for causal inference on observational data. We find that long-term adoption of conservation tillage increased rainfed maize yields by an average of 9.9% in the region. Impacts on irrigated yields were small and not statistically significant. These results, along with an analysis of variables related to greater than average yield benefits, indicate that improved water infiltration and retention are the primary reasons for conservation tillage benefits. Despite yield benefits, many fields estimated to see increased yields under long term low till have not adopted the practice. Therefore, we identify specific counties likely to benefit most from increased levels of adoption. Our results strengthen the understanding of the impacts of conservation agriculture on crop yields and help define environments and counties most likely to benefit from conservation tillage.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Long-term conservation tillage increased rainfed maize yields by an average of 9.9%.
- Treatment
- long-term adoption of conservation tillagee0
- Outcome
- rainfed maize yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 9.9%e0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“long-term adoption of conservation tillage increased rainfed maize yields by an average of 9.9% in the region.”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation tillage effects on irrigated maize yield were small and nonsignificant.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Impacts on irrigated yields were small and not statistically significant.”
t0“conservation tillage can increase maize yields”
t1“conservation tillage can increase maize yields”
Claim · model-written summary
Improved infiltration and retention were identified as the main reasons for yield benefits.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improved water infiltration and retention are the primary reasons for conservation tillage benefits.”
t0“maize”
t1“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Many fields predicted to gain yield from long-term low tillage had not adopted it.
- Outcome
- have not adopted the practicee0
- Qualifier
- estimated to see increased yields under long term low tille0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“many fields estimated to see increased yields under long term low till have not adopted the practice.”
t0“maize”
t1“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The analysis identified counties likely to benefit most from greater adoption.
Not reportedValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“we identify specific counties likely to benefit most from increased levels of adoption.”
t0“maize”
t1“maize”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.