HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Related articles in Crop Science Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lyon, D. J. Articles by Harveson, R. M. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Lyon, D. J. Articles by Harveson, R. M. Agricola Articles by Lyon, D. J. Articles by Harveson, R. M. Related Collections Economics Dryland Cropping Systems Wheat

CROP ECOLOGY, MANAGEMENT & QUALITY

Eliminating Summer Fallow Reduces Winter Wheat Yields, but Not Necessarily System Profitability

^a Panhandle Research and Extension Center, 4502 Avenue I, Scottsbluff, NE 69361
^b 351C Heep Center, 2474 Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2474

^* Corresponding author (dlyon1{at}unl.edu).

Summer fallow is commonly used to stabilize winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production in the Central Great Plains, but summer fallow results in soil degradation, limits farm productivity and profitability, and stores soil water inefficiently. The objectives of this study were to quantify the production and economic consequences of replacing summer fallow with spring-planted crops on the subsequent winter wheat crop. A summer fallow treatment and five spring crop treatments [spring canola (Brassica napus L.), oat (Avena sativa L.) + pea (Pisum sativum L.) for forage, proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.), dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.), and corn (Zea mays L.)] were no-till seeded into sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) residue in a randomized complete block design with five replications during 1999, 2000, and 2001. Winter wheat was planted in the fall following the spring crops. Five N fertilizer treatments (0, 22, 45, 67, and 90 kg N ha^–1) were randomly assigned to each previous spring crop treatment in a split-plot treatment arrangement. The 3-yr mean wheat grain yield after summer fallow was 29% greater than following oat + pea for forage and 86% greater than following corn. The 3-yr mean annualized net return for the spring crop and subsequent winter wheat crop was $4.20, –$6.91, –$7.55, –$29.66, –$81.17, and –$94.88 ha^–1 for oat + pea for forage, proso millet, summer fallow, dry bean, corn, and spring canola, respectively. Systems involving oat + pea for forage and proso millet are economically competitive with systems using summer fallow.

Abbreviations: DI, disease index • DR, disease severity rating

Related articles in Crop Science:

THIS ISSUE IN CROP SCIENCE

Crop Science 2004 44: 707-710. [Full Text]  

This article has been cited by other articles:

				D. J. Lyon, D. C. Nielsen, D. G. Felter, and P. A. Burgener Choice of Summer Fallow Replacement Crops Impacts Subsequent Winter Wheat Agron. J., March 12, 2007; 99(2): 578 - 584. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. G. Felter, D. J. Lyon, and D. C. Nielsen Evaluating Crops for a Flexible Summer Fallow Cropping System Agron. J., October 3, 2006; 98(6): 1510 - 1517. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]