Purpose <p>This study investigated the agronomic, economic, and environmental effects of variable depth subsoiling (VDS) as a precision agriculture solution to ameliorate spatially variable subsoil compaction, comparing it to traditional uniform depth subsoiling (UDS).</p> Methods <p>The research was conducted in two commercial silage maize fields in Belgium using a strip-trial design. Soil packing density (PD) maps were generated using a multi-sensor penetrometer to guide VDS treatments at varying depths (0, 40, and 50 cm) based on literature-defined compaction thresholds. Data on fuel consumption, carbon emissions, crop yield, and gross margins were collected and statistically analysed.</p> Results <p>Compared to the UDS treatment, VDS reduced fuel consumption and carbon emissions by up to 75.58%, improved crop yield by 2.04%, and increased gross margins by up to €36.21 ha<sup>-1</sup>. VDS reduced subsoil compaction to a degree similar to UDS, while the no-subsoiling (NS) control treatment showed minimal change.</p> Conclusion <p>VDS is a viable and more efficient solution for ameliorating subsoil compaction in fields with variable compaction. It offers clear agronomic, economic, and environmental benefits over conventional methods. Further long-term studies across various crops and soil types are needed to fully validate its widespread applicability. </p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Evaluating the economic and environmental effects of variable depth subsoiling in silage maize

  • Yongjing Wang,
  • Ajit Borundia,
  • Abdul Mounem Mouazen

摘要

Purpose

This study investigated the agronomic, economic, and environmental effects of variable depth subsoiling (VDS) as a precision agriculture solution to ameliorate spatially variable subsoil compaction, comparing it to traditional uniform depth subsoiling (UDS).

Methods

The research was conducted in two commercial silage maize fields in Belgium using a strip-trial design. Soil packing density (PD) maps were generated using a multi-sensor penetrometer to guide VDS treatments at varying depths (0, 40, and 50 cm) based on literature-defined compaction thresholds. Data on fuel consumption, carbon emissions, crop yield, and gross margins were collected and statistically analysed.

Results

Compared to the UDS treatment, VDS reduced fuel consumption and carbon emissions by up to 75.58%, improved crop yield by 2.04%, and increased gross margins by up to €36.21 ha-1. VDS reduced subsoil compaction to a degree similar to UDS, while the no-subsoiling (NS) control treatment showed minimal change.

Conclusion

VDS is a viable and more efficient solution for ameliorating subsoil compaction in fields with variable compaction. It offers clear agronomic, economic, and environmental benefits over conventional methods. Further long-term studies across various crops and soil types are needed to fully validate its widespread applicability.