Downloaded 294 times
Uploaded byGuru P N
conservation agriculture
The document discusses the role of conservation agriculture in modifying soil management practices to address climate change and enhance pest management. It details various studies on the impact of tillage systems on soil fauna, promoting beneficial organisms while mitigating pest populations through practices like reduced tillage and residue retention. Additionally, it highlights the importance of crop rotations and mixed planting strategies in controlling pests and improving biodiversity in agricultural systems.
More Related Content
Similar to conservation agriculture
conservation agriculture
- 1. Only within themoment of time represented by the present century has one species -MAN- acquire significant power to alter the nature of his world. -Rachel Carson 1
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6. A practice that contributesto mitigate the climate change CA in the World CA in Asia Importance of Conservation Agriculture 6
- 7. European Conservation AgricultureFederation, 2001, and FAO (2001).7
- 8. •Short-term conservation agriculturesystems (Mutema et al., 2010) • 45 studies of tillage and invertebrate pests 43% decreased with decreasing tillage. 29% did not change with a tillage system, and 28% increased with decreasing tillage, Stinner and House, 1990 Time consumption and yield potential of CA when compared to Conventional agriculture 8
- 9. Changes in tillage,residue, and rotation practices induce major shifts in the number and composition of soil fauna and flora, including both pests and beneficial organisms. Bockus and Shroyer 1998, Andersen 19999
- 10. ARTHROPODS “Early invaders” (Anderson,1988) Increasing the organic matter in crop soils was found to improve the pest resistance of crops due to increased benefecial soil faunal activity, improve nutrient balance and reduce nitrogen content. Altieri and Nicholls, 2003 Development of some macro-fauna (e.g. mites) are enhanced by tillage and appear to recover from tillage disturbances more rapidly. Reedler et al., 2006 and Wardle 1995 10
- 11.
- 12. Mites, springtails, epigeicenchytraeid worms and some earthworm species, isopods, millipedes and an array of insect larvae are among the most important meso- and macrofauna transforming the above ground litter entering the soil. Brussaard, 1998. Soil mites Mesostigmatids - predators Prostigmatids -predators and parasites. Astigmatids - associated with insect nests Cryptostigmatid -feed on fungi. 12
- 13. Collembola Collembola feed ondecaying plant material, fungi, bacteria, arthropod feces, pollen and algae. The moisture content of the soil is a main factor. Wallwork, 1970 Earthworms 1. Epigeic species 2. Endogeic species 3. Anecic species Bouché, 1982 13
- 14. Interactions between soil-associatedfauna and soil dynamicsInteractions between soil-associated fauna and soil dynamics 14
- 15.
- 16. Various equipments forplanting wheat no-till in Rice- Wheat Consortium (RWC). Inverted T coulter Indian no-till drill using inverted T Disc-type planter Star-wheel punch planter ‘Happy planter’ Disc planter with trash mover 16
- 17. Abundance of majorsoil macrofauna families as a function of the soil management system CT, conservation tillage; NT, no tillage; NTG, no tillage with grass mulch and NTL, no tillage with legume mulch. For each individual site, values of the same row followed by different letters are significantly different (ANOVA SAS GLM, P < 0.05). (): standard error. Class Experimental site Mean density (individuals/m2 ) Winde Zouana Family CT NT NTG NTL CT NT NTG NTL Insecta Formicidae 161 273 219 238 93 124 166 92 Termitidae 36 43 69 63 105 69 122 122 Larvae of coleoptera 13 b 19 b 50 a 37 ab 3 0 3 1 Carabidae 6 bc 24 a 21 ab 2 c 3 b 10 ab 21 a 9 ab Staphylinidae 0 0 6 9 6 b 7 b 22 a 10 ab Pyrrhocoridae 6 2 3 12 3 6 10 11 Diplopoda Julidae 17 b 29 ab 34 a 46 a 23 38 47 31 Polydesmidae 4 10 13 12 0 4 6 5 Hexapoda Japygidae 10 bc 0 c 23 ab 37 a 4 ab 1 8 a 3 b Lepismatidae 0 b 0 b 1 ab 4 a 0 c 6 bc 19 a 10 ab Arachnida Diverse araneae 11 b 14 ab 25 a 17 a 5 c 14 bc 29 a 17 ab Chilopoda Scolopendridae 2 b 4 b 8 b 15 a 1 1 3 5 Crustacea Porcellionidae 0 0 0 1 2 b 0 b 21 a 5 b Oligicheta Lumbricidae 11 c 19 bc 31 b 58 a 13 c 19 bc 61 a 29 b Brevault et al., 2007 17
- 18. Abundance of soilmacrofauna communities as a function of the soil management system. CT, conservation tillage; NT, no tillage; NTG, no tillage with grass mulch and NTL, no tillage with legume mulch. Brevault et al., 2007 18
- 19.
- 20. When the soilis disturbed and exposed with conventional tillage, many soil arthropod populations are severely affected. Mortality, fertility, and distribution of populations can be greatly affected by soil compaction, sudden drastic changes in temperature, and changes in relative humidity. Wallwork, 1976 Population of termite and white grubs generally increases under the reduced tillage. However, the effect of crop residues on termite damage is contentious. Organic mulches have been reported to increase damage of cutworms due to moisture conservation. Crop residues on the soil surface that conserves the moisture, may favour snails and slugs, causing damage to crops. Crop Residues Management with Conservation Agriculture: Potential, Constraints and Policy Needs, IARI, 2010 20
- 21. Microarthropod Sampling date June 5July 2 August 6 September 17 October 29 till no-till till no-till till no-till till no-till till no-till Mesostigmata 30 35 50 45 11 93 34 40 35 31 Prostigmata 42 56 159 59 674 254 253 120 104 106 Astigmata 30 32 42 47 52 79 68 65 44 83 Cryptostigmata 96 111 82 51 55 99 50 55 66 103 Hypogastru ridae 82 310 76 214 19 75 22 168 56 88 Onychiuridae 32 194 86 350 150 625 146 510 53 320 Isotomidae 231 135 557 233 568 479 387 559 182 354 Entomobryidae 3 - 1 - 2 1 2 1 1 0 Sminthuridae 3 2 - 1 - 3 - - 3 6 Marcella et al., 1985 21
- 22.
- 23. No-till Conventional PastureRemarks Reference 270 90 Not conducted On a very poorly drained soil, cultivation by normal ploughing Boone et al. (1976) 137 67 “ Cultivation by deep ploughing Gerard and Hay (1979) 913 213 “ Cultivation involved mouldboard ploughing, 3 disk ploughing and 2 rotary tilling House (1985) 342 130 “ Lupin/wheat rotation, three cultivation to 7 cm with a duck food scarifier Rovira et al. (1987) 275 117 “ Cultivation involved scarifying (10 cm) 2 or 3 times and a light harrowing (7 cm) Haines and Uren (1990) 266 48 477 -not known- Deibert et al. (1991) 467 52 1,017 -not known- Springett (1992) 250 175 825 Lismore site, after 8 years of cropping Francis and Knight (1993) Not conducted 52 168 -not known- Mele and Carter (1999) Abundance of earthworms (number m–2 ) under no-tillage, conventional tillage, and permanent pasture. 23
- 24. No-till Cotton afterCotton No-till Cotton after Wheat Cover Crop No-till Cotton after Corn Crop No-till upland rice after corn crop Scott, 2003 24
- 25.
- 26. It is aneffective way to provide shelter for predatory insects which play an important role in biological control. Mulch from Sunn hemp (Crotalaria juncea L.) hay was effective in reducing incidence of lesser cornstalk borer, Elasmopalpus lignocellus (Zeller) in Florida, USA. Gill et al., 2010 and 2013 Number of fire ants (predatory) will be higher in case of mulched fields compared to conventional fields. Pullaro et al., 2006 Using mulch as a ground cover decreases pest populations, and suggests that this decline is due to higher populations of natural predatory arthropods. Claire, 2006 Soil cover in the form of crop residues increased biological activity. Woltering, 2005 There is an increased species diversity when reduced tillage was combined with residue retention. Verhulst et al., 2010 26
- 27. Cover crops andintercrops have been used as living mulches for managing some insect pests. Alfalfa ( Medicago sativa L.) and kura clover ( Trifolium ambiguum M. Bieb.) mulches increased predator populations to manage European corn borer ( Ostrinia nubilalis Hübner) Prasifka et al., 2006 Eggs and larval densities of pest caterpillars were higher in broccoli ( Brassica oleracea L. var. Botrytis ) monoculture when compared to broccoli with undersown mulches like strawberry clover ( Tribolium fragiferum L.), white clover ( Tribolium repens L.), and yellow sweet clover ( Melilotus officinalis L.) Hooks and Johnson 2004 Alfalfa living mulch increased predators to manage outbreaks of the invasive soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Matsumura. Schmidt et al., 2007 27
- 28. Mulching potentially interfereswith oviposition preferences, host plant discrimination and host location of insect pests. Zehnder et al., 2007 Egg parasitoids in the family Scelionidae were higher in the mulch sites. Thomson and Hoffmann, 2007 Ants and dung beetles (Scarabaeidae)- good bioindicators of disturbance, habitat quality and land use Springtails -indicators in soil ecosystems. 28
- 29. Difference in arthropodpopulations in Broccoli and Bean crops Total with Mulch Total without Mulch P-Value (if Statistically Significant) Broccoli Bean Broccoli Bean Broccoli Bean Carabidae 38 93 571 402 0.000131 0.000250 Forficulidae 0 2 0 0 Linyphidae 7 44 20 117 0.004993 0.000562 Phalangidae 0 341 104 365 0.002932 Lithobiidae 13 46 4 15 0.048631 0.008093 Staphylinidae 0 19 2 22 Coccinellidae 1 0 36 0 0.003659 Claire, 2006 29
- 30. Addison et al.,2013 30
- 31. The effects ofreduced-tillage and soil cover on termite and ant abundance. Treatment Termites Ants Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 CA0t/ha 225 a 263 a 97 a 294 a 394 a 10 a 9 a 13 a 13 a 6 a CA2t/ha 600 b 637 b 188 b 356 a 806 b 19 b 13 b 13 a 19 a 6 a CA4t/ha 1269 c 713 c 875 c 1332 b 1331 c 25 c 25 c 25 b 88 b 19 b CA6t/ha 6463 d 1356 d 6044 d 2644 c 1525 d 38 c 38 d 44 c 106 b 50 c Conv. 81 e 0 e 25 e 38 e 6 e 0 d 6 e 13 a 0 c 0 d The effects of reduced-tillage and soil cover on centipede and beetle-larvae abundance. Treatment Centipede Beetle- larvae Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 Site 1 Site 2 Site 3 Site 4 Site 5 CA0t/ha 0 a 25 a 7 a 7 a 6 a 13 a 25 a 25 a 19 a 0 a CA2t/ha 0 a 25 a 7 a 13 b 13 b 25 b 31 a 44 b 31 b 6 b CA4t/ha 7 b 25 a 7 a 26 c 13 b 25 b 38 ab 50 b 38 b 13 c CA6t/ha 7 b 56 b 13 b 44 d 25 c 25 b 44 b 69 c 75 c 19 d Conv. 0 a 0 c 0 c 0 e 0 d 7 a 6 c 0 d 7 d 0 a Mutema et al., 201331
- 32. Abundance of otherinvertebratesAbundance of ant genera Six land uses were evaluated for their impact on soil macrofauna: 1) 40 yr-old secondary forest (F40); 2) 20 yr-old secondary forest (F20); 3) slash-and-burn cropping system (SB); 4) chop- and-mulch cropping system (CM); 5) slash-and-burn prepared pasture (PSB); 6) chop-and- mulch prepared pasture (PCM). Guillaume et al., 201032
- 33. Cow pea mulchSunn hemp mulch Sorghum- sudan grass mulch Pine bark mulch Lay out of experiments Harsimran and Gaurav, 201433
- 34.
- 35. No tillage (BBF)with mulch No tillage (flat bed) with mulch CA Block, UAS campus, Dharwad, 201335
- 36.
- 37.
- 38. 1. Plants withinthe same taxonomic family tend to have similar pests and pathogens. By regularly changing the planting location, the pest cycles can be broken or limited. 2. Some insect pests and disease-causing organisms are host specific. 3. The practice of rotating host and nonhost crops in alternate years is a traditional method of managing pest damage in agriculture. (Metcalf & Flint, 1967). 4. By growing a variety of flowering plants, specifically those belonging to Umbelliferae family, such as, coriander(Coriandrum sativum L.), fennel (Foeniculurn vulgare) and celery (Apium graveolens), natural enemies will be attracted. 38
- 39. Effect of croprotation on early season adult Colarado Potato Beetle densities in commercial potato fields, during 1982-83 Grower no. Date CPB adults/3 row-m Field typea R NR 1982 1 19 May 0.15 3.1b 2 19 May 0.04 1.6b 3 21 May 0.23 4.4b 9 18 May 0.28 0.32 NS 1983 6 25 May 0.2 2.0b 8 25 May 0.8 0.8 NS 10 24 May 5.4 10.6b a R, rotated potato field; NR, nonrotated potato field. b P<0.01, Two-sample t-test, df=16-44. NS, P>0.05. Robert, 1984 39
- 40.
- 41. Recent and mostrelevant attempts to use trap cropping in insect pest management Levels of implementation include unsuccessful, no potential shown in preliminary studies in the field and/or the laboratory (U); good potential shown in preliminary studies in the field (F); and successfully used by growers in commercial fields (S). 41
- 42. Marigold as atrap crop in cotton Okra as a trap crop in cotton CA Block, UAS campus, Dharwad, 201342
- 43. Marigold as atrap crop in Tomato Indian mustard as a trap crop in Cabbage 43
- 44. Conservation biological control Conservationbiological control (CBC) is the practice of enhancing natural enemy efficacy through modification of the environment or of existing pesticide practices. Eilenberg et al., 2001 (1)Honeydew as a food source for natural enemies (2)Artificial food sprays (3)Shelter habitats Advantages (1)Easy for growers to understand: ‘the value of diversity’, ‘natural enemies need more than their prey/host’, ‘inter-cropping’, ‘companion planting’ etc. (2) Individual growers can adopt (3) Conspicuous change to the farm landscape ‘beetle banks’ or flower strips 44
- 45.
- 46. Hierarchy of biocontrol-relatedbenefits that can be achieved from habitat manipulation. 1. Natural enemies aggregate on the flowers (pollen and/or nectar provision, mating platforms, shelter etc. 2. The fitness (fecundity, longevity, sex ratio, searching behavior etc.) of individual natural enemies increases. 3. Parasitism/predation rate increases. 4. Prey/host populations are reduced. 5.Prey/host populations are reduced below the economic threshold. 46
- 47. A form ofconservation biological control, is an ecologically based approach aimed at favouring natural enemies and enhancing biological control in agricultural systems. Landis & Wratten, 2000 Vegetation diversity augments natural enemies by providing supplemental resources, such as pollen, nectar, or other prey species, additional shelter and improved microclimate for the natural enemies. Kogan et al., 1998 It produces greater stability in the alfalfa ecosystem and prevents emigration of many natural enemy species at harvest Summers, 1976 Habitat managementHabitat management 47
- 48. * Means withdifferent letters (a, b, c and d) in neach column indicate significant difference (P<0.05) among insects in each group (e. g. Aphids). For Lavark region : N=162. For Borkhar and Ziar regions : N=72. Mean number and percentage of alfalfa aphids (per 20 stems ) and aphid natural enemies (per 20 sweeps ) in three regions and two years in Isfahan (Iran). Rakhshani et al., 2010 48
- 49. Comparison of meannumber of aphid natural enemy densities in harvested (white) and unharvested (hatched) strips within strip-harvested field. Rakhshani et al., 2010 49
- 50. Symbol ↓ showsharvesting date and * denote significant treatment difference within a sample date between unharvested and harvested strips at P < 0.05. Error bars show ± Standard Error. Comparison of mean number of aphid natural enemy densities in harvested (white) and unharvested (hatched) strips within strip-harvested field. Rakhshani et al., 2010 50
- 51. Mean number ofaphids/20 stems and aphid natural enemies/20 sweeps collected from strip-harvested and conventionally-harvested alfalfa fields during 18 sampling weeks. Mean number of aphids/20 stems and aphid natural enemies/20 sweeps collected from strip-harvested and conventionally-harvested alfalfa fields during 18 sampling weeks. Taxa Strip- harvested field Conventionally harvested field Difference LSD Hippodema variegata 7.47 5.38 +38% (s) 1.03 Nabis spp. 4.19 2.14 +95% (s) 0.93 Deraeocoris spp. 11.34 5.16 +119% (s) 3.99 Orius spp. 16.24 10.33 +57% (s) 1.87 Geocoris spp. 3.75 1.87 +100% (s) 1.35 Aphid parasitoides 5.65 2.54 +122% (s) 1.78 Acyrthosiphon pisum 12.69 16.64 -24% (s) 1.02 Theriophis trifolii 23.43 32.57 -28% (s) 3.13 (s): denotes significant difference between the two alfalfa fields. Rakhshani et al., 2010 51
- 52. Total abundance ofarthropods with chewing mouthparts in bush-land and cultivated land. Albert , 2014 52
- 53. BBF with Minimumtillage and mulch Conventional tillage (Redgram+Soybean) CA Block, UAS campus, Dharwad, 201353
- 54. BBF with Minimumtillage without mulch Cotton + Groundnut (BBF) CA Block, UAS campus, Dharwad, 201354
- 55.
- 56.
- 57.