Skip to main content
ARS Home » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #309949
Title: Remediation/restoration of degraded soil in the Central Great plains

Author
item Mikha, Maysoon
item STAHLMAN, PHILLIP - Kansas State University
item Benjamin, Joseph
item GEIER, PATRICK - Kansas State University

Submitted to: Meeting Proceedings
Publication Type: Proceedings
Publication Acceptance Date: 1/10/2014
Publication Date: 3/4/2014
Citation: Mikha, M.M., Stahlman, P.W., Benjamin, J.G., Geier, P.W. 2014. Remediation/restoration of degraded soil in the central Great plains. Meeting Proceedings. Great Plains Soil Fertility Conference. March 4-5, 2014. Denver, Colorado. 15:206-211.

Interpretive Summary: The experiment is being conducted at the Agricultural Research Center in Hays, Kansas. Two N-sources (beef manure, M; and commercial fertilizer, F) are being used and applied at two different rates. Tillage practices consisted on conventional tillage (CT) sweep tillage and no-tillage (NT). Data suggested that M could be the N source that can improve the productivity and nutrient dynamics of the eroded site compared with F.

Technical Abstract: Soil degradation became a problem in the arid region in the late 18th and early 19th century, as a consequence of agriculture expansion and conversion of native land to cropland. The objectives of this study are to evaluate the impact of different tillage practices, nitrogen (N) sources, and N rates on: (i) the productivity of eroded land and (ii) soil nutrient constitutes. The experiment was initiated in 2006 on eroded cropland at the Agricultural Research Center in Hays, Kansas. Tillage practices include no-tillage (NT) and conventional tillage (CT). Two N-sources (manure, M; commercial fertilizer, F; and control, no N added) were at low (L) and high (H) rates. Grain yields were not influenced by tillage practices, but by N treatments. Manure addition increased grain yields compared with F and C treatments. Soil (pH) was influenced by N treatments reduced in 2011 compared with 2006. Relative to control, more reduction in soil pH was observed with HM (21%) compared with HF treatment. Soil EC was approximately 2.2 times greater with HM and HF than LM and LF. Soil extractable phosphorus (P) at the surface 6 inch, substantially increased with HM, 45.9 mg kg-1 compared with LM, 18.3 mg kg-1. Overall, M could be the N source that can improve the productivity and nutrient dynamics of the eroded site compared with F.