Making double-drilled compacted strips
1. Presentation
Characterization of the technique
Description of the technique:
| Rémy Ballot | INRA | remy.ballot(at)grignon.inra.fr | Grignon (78) |
In small valley bottoms (watersheds of less than 100 ha under cultivation where the slope of the hillsides does not exceed 3% and the slope of the valley bottom is less than or equal to 2%), compact the water flow zone. Compacting the water flow zone can be complemented by doubling the sowing density. No-till gives the same results; in the case of a hoed plot, avoid hoeing the water flow zone, and in the case of a stubble cultivated plot during the intercrop period, do not work this zone.
Example of implementation:
When establishing wheat, make a second pass of the seeder over the water flow zone to achieve a doubled sowing density. A third pass of the tractor with the implement raised allows compacting this zone.
Implementation period On established crop
Spatial scale of implementation Plot
Application of the technique to...
All crops: Easily generalizable
This technique can be applied to all crops, but it is particularly justified for autumn crops, which leave the soil little covered during periods of heavy rainfall.
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
Other: No effect (neutral)
Fossil energy consumption: no effect (neutral)
The fuel consumption related to double-sowing or the additional pass with the implement raised on a localized area of the plot can be considered negligible.
GHG emissions: no effect (neutral)
The fuel consumption related to double-sowing or the additional pass with the implement raised on a localized area of the plot can be considered negligible.
"Agronomic" criteria
Productivity: No effect (neutral)
Soil fertility: No effect (neutral)
Water stress: No effect (neutral)
Biodiversity functional: No effect (neutral)
Other agronomic criteria: Variable
Disease pressure: Increase
Doubling the sowing density may promote the development of diseases (foliar diseases of cereal straw…)
Lodging risk: Increase
Doubling the sowing density may lead to an increased risk of lodging for sensitive crops.
"Economic" criteria
Operating costs: Increasing
Doubling the sowing density leads to an increase in costs related to seed purchase in variable proportions depending on the area concerned.
Mechanization costs: No effect (neutral)
The fuel consumption related to double-sowing or the additional pass with the implement raised on a localized area of the plot can be considered negligible.
Margin: Decreasing
"Social" criteria
Working time: No effect (neutral)
The time required to perform the double-sowing and the additional pass with the implement raised on a localized area of the plot can be considered negligible.
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 more information
- Sheet no. 11: Compacted strip
- -Coufourier N., Lecomte V., Le Goff A. (CA76), Pivain Y. (CA27), Lheriteau M., Ouvry J.F. (AREAS)
AREAS, Technical brochure
6. Keywords
Bioagressor control method:
Mode of action:
Type of strategy regarding pesticide use:
Annexes
S'applique aux cultures suivantes
