Alternating nitrogen-fixing crops and crops rapidly utilizing available nitrogen
1. Presentation
Characterization of the technique
Description of the technique:
| Vincent Lefèvre | ISARA | vlefevre(at)isara.fr | Lyon (69) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marc Moraine | INRA | marc.moraine(at)toulouse.inra.fr | Toulouse (31) |
| Rémy Ballot | INRA | remy.ballot(at)grignon.inra.fr | Grignon (78) |
Spam control: To use these addresses, replace (at) with @
Establish a crop rapidly utilizing available nitrogen (rapeseed…) after a crop leaving a significant nitrogen residue at harvest (pea, other legumes…).
Example of implementation:
Planting rapeseed after a pea crop allows, on the one hand, to limit nitrogen losses during the drainage period following pea harvest, and on the other hand to strongly reduce the nitrogen dose applied to rapeseed (50 u/ha) without penalizing its yield potential.
Details on the technique:
Beyond the following crop, intermediate crops can also be a way to utilize available nitrogen.
Implementation period On established crop
Spatial scale of implementation Plot
Application of the technique to...
All crops: Not generalizable
By definition, this technique can only be applied to crops leaving high residues, combined with crops capable of taking up large amounts of nitrogen early in their cycle.
Nitrogen-fixing crop: winter Faba bean, spring Faba bean, Bean, Lentil, winter sweet white Lupin, spring white Lupin, spring blue Lupin, Alfalfa, Garden peas, Chickpea, winter Pea, spring Pea, Alexandrian clover, White clover, Persian clover, Crimson clover, Micheli clover, Purple clover, common Vetch
Crop rapidly utilizing available nitrogen: winter Rapeseed, spring rapeseed, winter Mustard, spring Mustard
All soil types: Easily generalizable
All climatic contexts: Easily generalizable
Regulation
2. Services provided by the technique
3. Effects on the sustainability of the cropping system
"Environmental" criteria
Effect on air quality: Increasing
GHG emissions: DECREASE
Effect on water quality: Increasing
N.P.: DECREASE
Effect on fossil resource consumption: Decreasing
Fossil energy consumption: DECREASE
Other: No effect (neutral)
Air : the reduction in nitrogen fertilization needs enabled by the utilization of nitrogen returned by the previous crop allows a reduction in nitrous oxide emissions related to inputs. Furthermore, the reduction in nitrogen fertilization needs allows a reduction in GHG emissions linked to the manufacture of mineral fertilizers.
Water: the utilization of nitrogen returned by the previous crop limits losses by leaching.
Fossil resources: the reduction in nitrogen fertilization needs allows a reduction in fossil energy consumption linked to the manufacture of mineral fertilizers.
"Agronomic" criteria
Productivity: Increasing
In some cases, planting after a previous crop leaving a high nitrogen residue leads to an increase in the yield potential of the crop (the yield potential of rapeseed after pea is higher than that of rapeseed after cereal straw).
Nitrogen availability must however be taken into account in the choice of variety, and in the reasoning of sowing date and density to limit the risk of autumn elongation.
Soil fertility: No effect (neutral)
Water stress: No effect (neutral)
Functional Biodiversity: No effect (neutral)
Other agronomic criteria: Variable
Disease pressure: no effect (neutral) link=|alt=yellow face size 20
In the case of the pea - rapeseed succession, even though both crops are hosts of sclerotinia, the risk for rapeseed is not higher than after cereal straw.
Weed management: Increase link=|alt=green face size 20
In the case of the pea - rapeseed succession, grass weed pressure is lower for rapeseed than after cereal straw (no cereal regrowth). Moreover, the succession of two dicotyledonous crops effectively reduces the problematic grass seed bank in cereal-dominated rotations.
"Economic" criteria
Operational costs: Decreasing
The utilization of nitrogen returned by the previous crop reduces fertilization costs.
Mechanization costs: Decreasing
In the pea - rapeseed rotation, rapeseed establishment can be facilitated and require fewer passes (straw management).
Margin: Increasing
Increase on the crop and on the rotation.
Other economic criteria: No effect (neutral)
Fuel consumption : no effect.
"Social" criteria
Working time: No effect (neutral)
Observation time: No effect (neutral)
4. Favored or disadvantaged organisms
Favored Bioagressors
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|
Disadvantaged Bioagressors
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|
Favored Auxiliaries
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|
Disadvantaged Auxiliaries
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Type | Details |
|---|
Favored climatic and physiological accidents
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Details |
|---|
Disadvantaged climatic and physiological accidents
| Organism | Impact of the technique | Details |
|---|
5. For further information
- Taking into account the previous effects in crop profitability: To earn more with rapeseed, plant it after pea!
- -Dumans P., Flénet F., Wagner D. (Cetiom), Bonnin E. (CA58), Schneider A. (UNIP)
Agricultural Perspectives no. 368, pp. 4-8, Press article, 2010
6. Keywords
Bioagressor control method:
Mode of action:
Type of strategy regarding pesticide use:
