scholarly journals Effect of Cover Crop on Farm Profitability and Risk in the Southern High Plains

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (24) ◽  
pp. 7119
Author(s):  
Ram N. Acharya ◽  
Rajan Ghimire ◽  
Apar GC ◽  
Don Blayney
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Soil Health ◽  
High Plains ◽  
Southern High Plains ◽  
Cover Cropping ◽  
Secondary Benefits ◽  
Farm Profitability ◽  
On Farm

Cover cropping has been promoted for improving soil health and environmental quality in the southern High Plains (SHP) region of the United States. The SHP is one of the more productive areas of the country and covers a large landmass, including parts of Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Texas. This region faces challenges in sustainable crop production due to declining water levels in the Ogallala Aquifer, the primary source of water for irrigated crop production. This study examines the impact of integrating cover crops in the winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L)-based rotations on farm profitability and risk in the SHP. The study combines experimental yield data with other secondary information, including market prices, to conduct simulation analysis and evaluate the risk involved in introducing cover crops in a wheat-fallow cropping system. The results show that, due to the additional monetary costs involved, none of the cover crop options is economically viable. However, when secondary benefits (erosion control and green nitrogen) or government subsidies are included in the analysis, one of the cover crop options (peas) dominates the fallow alternative. Moreover, when the secondary benefits and a government subsidy are combined, two cover crop alternatives (peas and oats) emerge as more profitable options than leaving land fallow. These results highlight the importance of agricultural research and extension programs that are making a concerted effort to develop more productive farming techniques and increase public awareness about the long-term benefits of adopting soil health management systems such as cover cropping in the SHP region.

scholarly journals On-farm Soil Health Assessment of Cover-cropping in Florida

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Jehangir H. Bhadha ◽  
Nan Xu ◽  
Abul Rabbany ◽  
Naba R. Amgain ◽  
Jay Capasso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Soil Health ◽  
Health Indicators ◽  
Positive Change ◽  
The State ◽  
Crop Fields ◽  
Cover Cropping ◽  
On Farm ◽  
Soil Protein

Conventional cropping systems on sandy soils require continuous application of large amounts of external nutrients and irrigation water yet remain vulnerable to loses of these inputs. Within the state of Florida, need exists to provide farmers with economically viable alternatives that harness ecological processes and improve soil health and biodiversity. Cover crops are proving to be vital in the development of soil health. As part of this study we conducted a comprehensive on-farm assessment involving nine collaborative growers (ten farms) across the state; with each individual farm following its unique cover-cropping practice. Our goal was to shadow their practice and determine its effect on soil health indicators such as soil pH, bulk density (BD), maximum water holding capacity (MWHC), organic matter (OM), active carbon, cation exchange capacity, soil protein, Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total phosphorus (TP), Mehlich-3 P (M3P) and potassium (M3K). Compared to fallow, soil OM, MWHC, and soil protein showed increases in cover crop fields for most farms, which presented a positive change towards building up soil health. Although soil TKN level was significantly decreased due to cover crops, soil protein level building up over time was the most positive change for soil health. M3K decreased in cover-crop fields, which indicated that supplementary K would be necessary prior to planting subsequent cash crops.

A survey of cover crop practices and perceptions of sustainable farmers in North Carolina and the surrounding region

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (6) ◽  
pp. 550-562 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. O'Connell ◽  
J.M. Grossman ◽  
G.D. Hoyt ◽  
W. Shi ◽  
S. Bowen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Warm Season ◽  
Organic Production ◽  
Environmental Benefits ◽  
Cover Cropping ◽  
Survey Population ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Production Areas

AbstractThe environmental benefits of cover cropping are widely recognized but there is a general consensus that adoption levels are still quite low among US farmers. A survey was developed and distributed to more than 200 farmers engaged in two sustainable farming organizations in NC and the surrounding region to determine their level of utilization, current practices and perceptions related to cover cropping. The majority of farms surveyed had diverse crop production, production areas <8 ha, and total gross farm incomes <US$50,000. Approximately one-third of the survey population had an organic production component. Eighty-nine percent of participants had a crop rotation plan and 79% of the total survey population utilized cover cropping. More than 25 different cool- and warm-season cover crops were reported. The statements that generated the strongest agreement about cover crop benefits were that cover crops: increase soil organic matter, decrease soil erosion, increase soil moisture, contribute nitrogen to subsequent cash crops, suppress weeds, provide beneficial insect habitat and break hard pans with their roots. Economic costs associated with cover cropping were not viewed as an obstacle to implementation. A factor analysis was conducted to identify underlying themes from a series of positive and negative statements about cover crops. Pre- and post-management challenges were able to explain the most variability (30%) among participant responses. Overall, participants indicated that the incorporation of residues was their greatest challenge and that a lack of equipment, especially for no-till systems, influenced their decisions about cover cropping. Farmers did not always appear to implement practices that would maximize potential benefits from cover crops.

scholarly journals The hidden land use cost of upscaling cover crops

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryan Runck ◽  
Colin K. Khoury ◽  
Patrick M. Ewing ◽  
Michael Kantar
Keyword(s):  
Land Use ◽  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
The United States ◽  
Maize Production ◽  
Cover Cropping ◽  
Current Production ◽  
Production Area ◽  
Annual Amount

AbstractCover cropping is considered a cornerstone practice in sustainable agriculture; however, little attention has been paid to the cover crop production supply chain. In this Perspective, we estimate land use requirements to supply the United States maize production area with cover crop seed, finding that across 18 cover crops, on average 3.8% (median 2.0%) of current production area would be required, with the popular cover crops rye and hairy vetch requiring as much as 4.5% and 11.9%, respectively. The latter land requirement is comparable to the annual amount of maize grain lost to disease in the U.S. We highlight avenues for reducing these high land use costs.

scholarly journals Cover Crop Management on the Southern High Plains: Impacts on Crop Productivity and Soil Water Depletion

Animals ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 212
Author(s):  
Lisa L. Baxter ◽  
Charles P. West ◽  
C. Philip Brown ◽  
Paul E. Green
Keyword(s):  
Soil Water ◽  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
The United States ◽  
Eragrostis Tef ◽  
High Plains ◽  
Soil Water Depletion ◽  
Southern High Plains ◽  
Water Depletion ◽  
No Till

The imminent depletion of the Ogallala Aquifer demands innovative cropping alternatives. Even though the benefits of cover crops are well recognized, adoption has been slow in the Southern High Plains (SHP) of the United States because of concerns that cover crops withdraw soil water to the detriment of the summer crops. This small plot experiment tested the interacting effects—production, soil water depletion of the cover crops, and subsequent teff [Eragrostis tef (Zucc.) Trotter] summer hay crops—of irrigation and tillage management with five cover crop types to identify low-risk cover crop practices in the drought-prone SHP. Dryland rye (Secale cereale L.) produced modest forage biomass (>1000 kg ha−1), even in a dry year, but it was found that light irrigation should be used to ensure adequate forage supply (>1200 kg ha−1) if winter grazing is desired. No-till management and timely termination of the winter cover crops were crucial to reducing the negative impact of winter crops on summer teff production. The results indicated no detriment to soil water content that was attributable to planting no-till cover crops compared with the conventional practice of winter fallow. Therefore, producers could take advantage of the soil-conserving attributes of high-quality winter forage cover crops without experiencing significant soil water depletion.

173 Grazing Cover Crops: Effects of Cattle Removal Date on Forage Production and Cattle Performance

2021 ◽  
Vol 99 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. 94-94
Author(s):  
Russell C Carrell ◽  
Sandra L Dillard ◽  
Mary K Mullenix ◽  
Audrey Gamble ◽  
Russ B Muntifering
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Average Daily Gain ◽  
Forage Yield ◽  
Neutral Detergent Fiber ◽  
Forage Production ◽  
Cool Season ◽  
Total Gain ◽  
Cattle Performance

Abstract Use of cool-season annual cover crops through grazing has been shown to be a potential tool in extending the grazing season, while still mitigating environmental risks associated with warm-season row crop production. Although data describing the effects of grazing on soil health are not novel, effects of grazing length on animal performance and cover crop production are limited. The objective was to determine cattle performance and forage production when grazing a cool-season annual cover-crop. Twelve, 1.2-ha pastures were established in a four species forage mix and randomly allocated to be grazed through either mid-February (FEB), mid-March (MAR), or mid-April (APR) with a non-grazed control (CON). Three tester steers were randomly placed in each paddock and a 1:1 forage allowance was maintained in each paddock using put-and-take steers. Animals were weighed every 30 d for determination of average daily gain (ADG). Forage was harvested bi-weekly and analyzed for forage production, neutral detergent fiber (NDF), and acid detergent fiber (ADF). Fiber fractions were measured using an ANKOM fiber analyzer (ANKOM Tech, Macedon, NY). All data were analyzed using MIXED procedure of SAS version 9.4 (SAS Inst., Cary, NC). Differences in forage mass were detected between CON and FEB (3,694.75 vs. 2,539.68 kg/ha; P &lt; 0.003), CON and MAR (3,694.75 vs. 1,823.45 kg/ha; P &lt; 0.001), and CON and APR (3,694.75 vs. 1,976.23 kg/ha; P &lt; 0.001). Differences in total gain/acre were detected between APR and MAR (212.24 vs. 101.74 kg/ha; P &lt; 0.0001), APR and FEB (212.24 vs 52.65 kg/ha; P &lt; 0.0001), and FEB and MAR (101.74 vs. 52.65 kg/ha; P &lt; 0.003). No differences were detected for tester ADG (1.23 kg/day, P = 0.56), NDF (44.9%, P = 0.99), or ADF (27.2%, P = 0.92) among treatments. These results indicate that cattle removal date effected forage yield and total gain/hectare.

Cover crop effects on soil temperature in a clay loam soil in southwestern Ontario

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
X.M. Yang ◽  
W.D. Reynolds ◽  
C.F. Drury ◽  
M.D. Reeb
Keyword(s):  
Soil Temperature ◽  
Cover Crops ◽  
Environmental Performance ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Surface Soil ◽  
Clay Loam ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
Soil Temperatures ◽  
Surface Soil Temperature

Although it is well established that soil temperature has substantial effects on the agri-environmental performance of crop production, little is known of soil temperatures under living cover crops. Consequently, soil temperatures under a crimson clover and white clover mix, hairy vetch, and red clover were measured for a cool, humid Brookston clay loam under a corn–soybean–winter wheat/cover crop rotation. Measurements were collected from August (after cover crop seeding) to the following May (before cover crop termination) at 15, 30, 45, and 60 cm depths during 2018–2019 and 2019–2020. Average soil temperatures (August–May) were not affected by cover crop species at any depth, or by air temperature at 60 cm depth. During winter, soil temperatures at 15, 30, and 45 cm depths were greater under cover crops than under a no cover crop control (CK), with maximum increase occurring at 15 cm on 31 January 2019 (2.5–5.7 °C) and on 23 January 2020 (0.8–1.9 °C). In spring, soil temperatures under standing cover crops were cooler than the CK by 0.1–3.0 °C at 15 cm depth, by 0–2.4 °C at the 30 and 45 cm depths, and by 0–1.8 °C at 60 cm depth. In addition, springtime soil temperature at 15 cm depth decreased by about 0.24 °C for every 1 Mg·ha−1 increase in live cover crop biomass. Relative to bare soil, cover crops increased near-surface soil temperature during winter but decreased near-surface soil temperature during spring. These temperature changes may have both positive and negative effects on the agri-environmental performance of crop production.

scholarly journals No-tillage sorghum and garbanzo yields match or exceed standard tillage yields

2022 ◽  
pp. 112-120
Author(s):  
Jeffrey P. Mitchell ◽  
Anil Shrestha ◽  
Lynn Epstein ◽  
Jeffery A. Dahlberg ◽  
Teamrat Ghezzehei ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Crop Production ◽  
Crop Yields ◽  
Soil Surface ◽  
San Joaquin Valley ◽  
Agricultural Water Use ◽  
No Till ◽  
Use Efficiency ◽  
Crop System

To meet the requirements of California's Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, there is a critical need for crop production strategies with less reliance on irrigation from surface and groundwater sources. One strategy for improving agricultural water use efficiency is reducing tillage and maintaining residues on the soil surface. We evaluated high residue no-till versus standard tillage in the San Joaquin Valley with and without cover crops on the yields of two crops, garbanzo and sorghum, for 4 years. The no-till treatment had no primary or secondary tillage. Sorghum yields were similar in no-till and standard tillage systems while no-till garbanzo yields matched or exceeded those of standard tillage, depending on the year. Cover crops had no effect on crop yields. Soil cover was highest under the no-till with cover crop system, averaging 97% versus 5% for the standard tillage without cover crop system. Our results suggest that garbanzos and sorghum can be grown under no-till practices in the San Joaquin Valley without loss of yield.

scholarly journals Mustard Cover Crop Growth and Weed Suppression in Organic, Strawberry Furrows in California

HortScience ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 432-440 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eric B. Brennan ◽  
Richard F. Smith
Keyword(s):  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Sinapis Alba ◽  
Weed Suppression ◽  
Shoot Biomass ◽  
Plastic Mulch ◽  
Seeding Rate ◽  
Crop Cover ◽  
Cover Cropping ◽  
Growing Seasons

Strawberry (Fragaria ×ananassa Duch.) production in California uses plastic mulch–covered beds that provide many benefits such as moisture conservation and weed control. Unfortunately, the mulch can also cause environmental problems by increasing runoff and soil erosion and reducing groundwater recharge. Planting cover crops in bare furrows between the plastic cover beds can help minimize these problems. Furrow cover cropping was evaluated during two growing seasons in organic strawberries in Salinas, CA, using a mustard (Sinapis alba L.) cover crop planted at two seeding rates (1× and 3×). Mustard was planted in November or December after strawberry transplanting and it resulted in average densities per meter of furrow of 54 and 162 mustard plants for the 1× and 3× rates, respectively. The mustard was mowed in February before it shaded the strawberry plants. Increasing the seeding rate increased mustard shoot biomass and height, and reduced the concentration of P in the mustard shoots. Compared with furrows with no cover crop, cover-cropped furrows reduced weed biomass by 29% and 40% in the 1× and 3× seeding rates, respectively, although weeds still accounted for at least 28% of the furrow biomass in the cover-cropped furrows. These results show that growing mustard cover crops in furrows without irrigating the furrows worked well even during years with relatively minimal precipitation. We conclude that 1) mustard densities of ≈150 plants/m furrow will likely provide the most benefits due to greater biomass production, N scavenging, and weed suppression; 2) mowing was an effective way to kill the mustard; and 3) high seeding rates of mustard alone are insufficient to provide adequate weed suppression in strawberry furrows.

scholarly journals The Perceived Benefits, Challenges, and Environmental Effects of Cover Crop Implementation in South Carolina

Agriculture ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 372
Author(s):  
Lucas Clay ◽  
Katharine Perkins ◽  
Marzieh Motallebi ◽  
Alejandro Plastina ◽  
Bhupinder Singh Farmaha
Keyword(s):  
South Carolina ◽  
Cover Crops ◽  
Cover Crop ◽  
Management Practice ◽  
Soil Health ◽  
Education Level ◽  
Limited Information ◽  
Best Management ◽  
Row Crop ◽  
The Impact

Cover crops are becoming more accepted as a viable best management practice because of their ability to provide important environmental and soil health benefits. Because of these benefits, many land managers are strongly encouraging the use of cover crops. Additionally, there is limited information on farmers′ perceptions of the benefits and challenges of implementing cover crops. Many farmers state that they do not have enough money or time to implement cover crops. In an attempt to gather more data about the adoption rate and perceptions of cover crops in South Carolina, a survey was sent to 3000 row crop farmers across the state. Farmers were asked whether they implement cover crops and their perceptions of the benefits and challenges associated with implementation. Furthermore, questions were asked regarding the impact of row cropping on their environment to gauge farmer′s education level on environmental impacts. Responses showed many people are implementing cover crops; however, there are still differences in perceptions about benefits and challenges between those who are adopting cover crops and those who are not. This research assesses these differences and aims to provide a baseline for focusing cover crop programs to tackle these certain challenges and promote the benefits.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document