Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T12:47:42.927Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Crop rotation and sowing date effects on yield of winter wheat

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2024

Marten Groeneveld ,
Dennis Grunwald Open the ORCID record for Dennis Grunwald [Opens in a new window] ,
Hans-Peter Piepho Open the ORCID record for Hans-Peter Piepho [Opens in a new window]  and
Heinz-Josef Koch
Marten Groeneveld
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Institute of Sugar Beet Research, Holtenser Landstraße 77, 37079 Göttingen, Germany
Dennis Grunwald*
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Institute of Sugar Beet Research, Holtenser Landstraße 77, 37079 Göttingen, Germany
Hans-Peter Piepho
Affiliation:
Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Crop Science, University of Hohenheim, Fruwirthstrasse 23, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Heinz-Josef Koch
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, Institute of Sugar Beet Research, Holtenser Landstraße 77, 37079 Göttingen, Germany
*
Corresponding author: Dennis Grunwald; Email: grunwald@ifz-goettingen.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Simplified cereal-based crop rotations are widely grown due to economic reasons, leading to the cultivation of wheat after wheat and associated yield losses. In this study, a crop rotation trial was conducted in Northern Germany on a Stagnic Luvisol from 2006 to 2018 with winter wheat after the four most widely used preceding crops in the region (sugar beet, winter wheat, silage maize and winter oilseed rape) in different crop rotations to evaluate potential benefits of different preceding crops. Additionally, the effects of two different sowing dates (2016–2018) and higher crop residue input (whole period) were investigated.

While the pre-preceding crop had no effect, preceding crops winter oilseed rape and sugar beet led to a significantly higher yield of about 1.00 and 0.43 t/ha, respectively, compared to wheat after wheat. This was not modified by crop rotational diversity, including wheat monoculture. Wheat yield tended to be higher for the late sowing date after sugar beet, maize and wheat, while there was no effect of sowing date after oilseed rape. Higher crop residue input led to a significantly higher yield (0.30 t/ha) in wheat after wheat (after pre-preceding crop sugar beet). Overall, sugar beet and winter oilseed rape were found to be favourable preceding crops for winter wheat under the given site conditions. The effect of sowing date on yield and potential modifications of the preceding crop effect by sowing date needs further research in appropriate long-term trials.

Keywords

preceding croppre-cropsilage maizesugar beetwinter oilseed rape
Type
Crops and Soils Research Paper
Information
The Journal of Agricultural Science , First View , pp. 1 - 11
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andert, S, Bürger, J, Stein, S and Gerowitt, B (2016) The influence of crop sequence on fungicide and herbicide use intensities in North German arable farming. European Journal of Agronomy 77, 81–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Angus, JF, Kirkegaard, JA, Hunt, JR, Ryan, MH, Ohlander, L and Peoples, MB (2015) Break crops and rotations for wheat. Crop and Pasture Science 66, 523–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arnhold, J, Grunwald, D, Braun-Kiewnick, A and Koch, HJ (2023a) Effect of crop rotational position and nitrogen supply on root development and yield formation of winter wheat. Frontiers in Plant Science 14, 1265994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arnhold, J, Grunwald, D, Kage, H and Koch, HJ (2023b) No differences in soil structure under winter wheat grown in different crop rotational positions. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 103, 642–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bateman, GL (1986) Effects of triadimenol-containing seed treatment on winter wheat infected with take-all. Zeitschrift für Pflanzenkrankheiten und Pflanzenschutz 93, 404–414.Google Scholar
Berzsenyi, Z, Győrffy, B and Lap, D (2000) Effect of crop rotation and fertilisation on maize and wheat yields and yield stability in a long-term experiment. European Journal of Agronomy 13, 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bundessortenamt (2022) Beschreibende Sortenliste. Bundessortenamt. Available at https://www.bundessortenamt.de/bsa/media/Files/BSL/bsl_getreide_2022.pdf (accessed on 2 September 2022).Google Scholar
Chan, KY and Heenan, DP (1996) The influence of crop rotation on soil structure and soil physical properties under conventional tillage. Soil and Tillage Research 37, 113–’125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christen, O, Sieling, K and Hanus, H (1992) The effect of different preceding crops on the development, growth and yield of winter wheat. European Journal of Agronomy 1, 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Claupein, W and Zoschke, M (1987) Einfluß langjähriger Winterweizen-Monokultur auf Ertragsbildung, Krankheitsbefall und Nematodenbesatz im Vergleich zum Winterweizenanbau in der Fruchtfolge. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 158, 227–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colbach, N, Lucas, P and Meynard, JM (1997) Influence of crop management on take-all development and disease cycles on winter wheat. Phytopathology 87, 26–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DWD (2022) Climate Data Center (CDC). Deutscher Wetterdienst (DWD). Available at https://cdc.dwd.de/portal/ (accessed on 7 April 2022).Google Scholar
Ellerbrock, RH and Gerke, HH (2016) Analyzing management-induced dynamics of soluble organic matter composition in soils from long-term field experiments. Vadose Zone Journal 15, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
EU 2021/2115. Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council. Official Journal of the European Union.Google Scholar
Gerlagh, M (1968) Introduction of Ophiobolus graminis into new polders and its decline. Netherlands Journal of Plant Pathology 74, 1–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grunwald, D, Götze, P and Koch, H-J (2021) Soil organic carbon stocks in sugar beet rotations differing in residue management and associated rotational crop species. Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science 184, 556–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamer, U, Meyer, MUT, Meyer, UN, Radermacher, A, Götze, P, Koch, HJ and Scherber, C (2021) Soil microbial biomass and enzyme kinetics for the assessment of temporal diversification in agroecosystems. Basic and Applied Ecology 53, 143–153.Google Scholar
Hijbeek, R, van Ittersum, MK, ten Berge, H, Gort, G, Spiegel, H and Whitmore, AP (2017) Do organic inputs matter – a meta-analysis of additional yield effects for arable crops in Europe. Plant and Soil 411, 293–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IUSS Working Group WRB (2014) World Reference Base for Soil Resources 2014. International soil classification system for naming soils and creating legends for soil maps. World Soil Resources Reports No. 106. FAO, Rome.Google Scholar
Jenkyn, JF, Gutteridge, RJ and White, RP (2014) Effects of break crops, and of wheat volunteers growing in break crops or in set-aside or conservation covers, all following crops of winter wheat, on the development of take-all (Gaeumannomyces graminis var. tritici) in succeeding crops of winter wheat. Annals of Applied Biology 165, 340–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kassambara, A (2020) ggpubr: ‘ggplot2’ Based Publication Ready Plots. Available at https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=ggpubrGoogle Scholar
Kenward, MG and Roger, JH (1997) Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood. Biometrics 53, 983–997.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirkegaard, JA and Ryan, MH (2014) Magnitude and mechanisms of persistent crop sequence effects on wheat. Field Crops Research 164, 154–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirkegaard, J, Christen, O, Krupinsky, J and Layzell, D (2008) Break crop benefits in temperate wheat production. Field Crops Research 107, 185–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleijn, D, Bommarco, R, Fijen, TPM, Garibaldi, LA, Potts, SG and van der Putten, WH (2019) Ecological intensification: bridging the gap between science and practice. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 34, 154–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koppensteiner, LJ, Kaul, H-P, Piepho, H-P, Barta, N, Euteneuer, P, Bernas, J, Klimek-Kopyra, A, Gronauer, A and Neugschwandtner, RW (2022) Yield and yield components of facultative wheat are affected by sowing time, nitrogen fertilization and environment. European Journal of Agronomy 140, 126591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loughin, TM, Roediger, MP, Milliken, GA and Schmidt, JP (2007). On the analysis of long-term experiments. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 170, 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macholdt, J and Honermeier, B (2019) Stability analysis for grain yield of winter wheat in a long-term field experiment. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 65, 686–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macholdt, J, Piepho, H-P, Honermeier, B, Perryman, S, Macdonald, A and Poulton, P (2020) The effects of cropping sequence, fertilization and straw management on the yield stability of winter wheat (1986–2017) in the Broadbalk Wheat Experiment, Rothamsted, UK. The Journal of Agricultural Science 158, 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDaniel, MD, Grandy, AS, Tiemann, LK and Weintraub, MN (2014) Crop rotation complexity regulates the decomposition of high and low quality residues. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 78, 243–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oldfield, EE, Bradford, MA and Wood, SA (2019) Global meta-analysis of the relationship between soil organic matter and crop yields. SOIL 5, 15–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onofri, A, Seddaiu, G and Piepho, H-P (2016) Long-term experiments with cropping systems: case studies on data analysis. European Journal of Agronomy 77, 223–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ortiz-Monasterio, JI, Dhillon, SS and Fischer, RA (1994) Date of sowing effects on grain yield and yield components of irrigated spring wheat cultivars and relationships with radiation and temperature in Ludhiana, India. Field Crops Research 37, 169–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozturk, A, Caglar, O and Bulut, S (2006) Growth and yield response of facultative wheat to winter sowing, freezing sowing and spring sowing at different seeding rates. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 192, 10–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, G, Smith, P and Pan, W (2009) The role of soil organic matter in maintaining the productivity and yield stability of cereals in China. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 129, 344–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piepho, H-P, Büchse, A and Emrich, K (2003) A Hitchhiker's guide to mixed models for randomized experiments. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 189, 310–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reeves, DW (1997) The role of soil organic matter in maintaining soil quality in continuous cropping systems. Soil and Tillage Research 43, 131–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RStudio (2022) RStudio Version 2022.02.3. Available at https://rstudio.comGoogle Scholar
Rubio, V, Diaz-Rossello, R, Quincke, JA and van Es, HM (2021) Quantifying soil organic carbon's critical role in cereal productivity losses under annualized crop rotations. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 321, 107607.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SAS Institute Inc. (2016) SAS Version 9.4.Google Scholar
Schönhammer, A and Fischbeck, G (1987 a) Investigation at cereal dominated crop rotations and cereal monocultures. I. The differentiation of yield performance and yield components during a 15 year cultivation period. Bayerisches landwirtschaftliches Jahrbuch 64, 175–191.Google Scholar
Schönhammer, A and Fischbeck, G (1987 b) Investigation at cereal dominated crop rotations and cereal monocultures. III. Changes in soil properties. Bayerisches landwirtschaftliches Jahrbuch 64, 681–694.Google Scholar
Sieling, K and Christen, O (2015) Crop rotation effects on yield of oilseed rape, wheat and barley and residual effects on the subsequent wheat. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 61, 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sieling, K and Hanus, H (1990) Yield reaction of winter wheat in monoculture in dependence upon weather and soil. Journal of Agronomy and Crop Science 165, 151–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sieling, K, Stahl, C, Winkelmann, C and Christen, O (2005) Growth and yield of winter wheat in the first 3 years of a monoculture under varying N fertilization in NW Germany. European Journal of Agronomy 22, 71–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sieling, K, Ubben, K and Christen, O (2007) Effects of preceding crop, sowing date, N fertilization and fluquinconazole seed treatment on wheat growth, grain yield and take-all. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 114, 213–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, RG, Gross, KL and Robertson, GP (2008) Effects of crop diversity on agroecosystem function: crop yield response. Ecosystems 11, 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steinmann, H-H and Dobers, ES (2013) Spatio-temporal analysis of crop rotations and crop sequence patterns in Northern Germany: potential implications on plant health and crop protection. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection 120, 85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The R Foundation for Statistical Computing (2022) R Version 4.2.1. Available at https://r-project.orgGoogle Scholar
Weiser, C, Fuß, R, Kage, H and Flessa, H (2018) Do farmers in Germany exploit the potential yield and nitrogen benefits from preceding oilseed rape in winter wheat cultivation? Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 64, 25–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wickham, H (2016) ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York: Springer, 260 S.CrossRefGoogle Scholar