The influence of organicmatter for improving soil

condition

Ing. Ivana Šindelková

20.3.2018

„Nation, that destroys its soilis destroying itself”!

USA Law of soil protection 1936

Signed by F. D. Roosevelt

Beginning statement:„Prosperity of the nation is characterized

by its care of its own land”

Soil – mile stone of profitable agriculture

Basic thematic fields – GAEC (Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition of land)

The soil erosion

( GAEC 1, GAEC 2 )

The soil organical components

( GAEC 3, GAEC 4 )

The soil structure

( GAEC 5 )

The minimum level of care

( GAEC 6, GAEC 7, GAEC 8 a GAEC 9 )

Water protection and economy

( GAEC 10, GAEC 11 )

These standards ensure environmental friendly farming

and are part of Cross Compliance.

EU subsidy system – positive & negative motivation

Soil protection – task & challenge

GAEC – EU soil protection directive

Goal Evaluated criteria

Soil erosion:

Soil protection by correct management

Minimum soil coverage

Minimum rules of land management taking in account local specific conditions

Protection of terraces

Organic matter in soil:

Protection of soil organic matter via correct soil management practices

Cropping pattern

Stubble management

Mulch treatment

Soil structure:

Protection of soil structure by correct use of machinery

Use of suitable machinery

Vertical soil tillage

Minimal level of soil management:

Ensuring minimal level of soil management and preventing the degradation of the land

Minimum animal density

Protection of pastures

Protection of countryside

Prevention of weed spreads

Organic soil in soil is very important!!!!

Organic matter

Nutrient supply

Deficiency = Soil Degradation!!!

Influence on the waterregime of the soil

Support for soilaggregate mineralparticles

• The deterioration of soil biological activity

• Reducing porosity

• Washing of soil aggregates

• Loss of structure

To protect carbon reserveDecrease of the organic matter content in surface layer of soil types causes:

On the soils with minimal biological activity there is biodegradation of organical matter combined with the loss of nutritions and carbon.

Current status and its consequences organical components of the soil and its structure

The deterioration of soil biological activity

Declining level of biological life in soil is related to the lackof air and the associated anaerobic processes in the soilprofile.

The result is an unhealthy environment, where organicresidues are decomposted by fungi and purid processes,which cause the loss of nutrients and formation ofunfriendly environment for roof growth and consequentlywhole plants.

Current status and its consequences organical components of the soil and its structure

Reducing porosity

The lack of macropores and the disparity between thecapillary pores in effect means the deterioration of waterinfiltration, surface runoff and also related to increasedrisk of soil erosion.

Paradoxically, then the soil profile without structure verysoon may suffer from a lack of soil moisture even afterheavy rainfall.

Current status and its consequences organical components of the soil and its structure

Soil compaction - an acute problemof current agricultural production

The physical condition of the soil reduces the production potential of plants !!!

Current status and its consequences organical components of the soil and its structure

Washing of soil aggregatesIn biologically few active soil there sicompaction, blocks with sharp edges atdepth of 12 to 15 cm are very often orcompact soil boards are formed.

Soil compaction strongly lemits thedevelopment of plant roots and oftencauses them hydromorphy.

The rhizophere is not working withoutactive root system and the level ofmetabolism between plants and soil isminimal, which is one of the major causesof reduced yields.

Foto:

Václavík

Loss of structure

It is a consequence of the above phenomenaand is approved the most during the soiltillage.

Not only that individual operations areenergetical intensive (often more than 50 %)but also significantly decreases the quality ofsoil tillage, surface is rough and it has anegative impact on seed quality, emergenceand crop uniformity.

Current status and its consequences organical components of the soil and its structure

SUMMARY - Possible solutions

Soil erosion

Soil protection technologies

Sowing into mulch

The soil organical components

Right usage of manure

Management of post-harvest residues

Soil structure

Minimalization technologies

Vertical tillage

The minimum level of care

Creating resources in the farm management

Targeted usage of subsidies

Water protection and economy

Reduction in consumption of fertilizers through the use of organic sources of nutrients.

Prevent loss of chemicals leaking into the runoff and deep soil profile

FIELD EXPERIMENT

Used solutions and resultsthe soil organical components

2017-2022

Results from the first year of research - 2017

EXPERIMENT - support for soil biology

"Increasing the bioavailability and bioavailability of biostimulation„

"Biostimulation in Plant Nutrition and Impact on Soil Properties„

Project crop rotation with the support of biostimulators

„The study of biological properties of soils and proposals leading to the transformation of organic matter and making available nutrients in the soil environment“

Project goal: Defining of soil properties change after biostimulant application.

Consequential impact on soil production and cropping systems efficiency.

Selection of land

Localization of the interest production

block in the Litobratřice cadastral area.

Satellite view

Agricultural land Soil block4302/1 (07/2015) expression of vegetationvariability

Agricultural land Soil block 4302/1 (09/2016) expression of vegetation variability

Maturity of the sugar beet. The blue part after the harvest of the crop. A deep red color identifies vital vegetation, pink color demonstrates ripening vegetation that gradually loses chlorophyll

Satelite view on FL u SB 4302/1 (05/2017)Vegetation index

Satelite view 28.5.2017

The use of satellite scenes as a tool for the evaluation of the characteristics of the field

The more detailed preparation brings more relevant results!!!

Utilization of satelite scenes as a toolfor evaluation of field characteristic & changes

Strategic approach and data

• Analyze of fore passed and actual situation

• Analyze of special variability and homogenityof field – moisture & crop conditions

• Visualisation of changes in homogenity of soil conditions

• Detailed background data for preparation of measurements

Operative approach and data

• Analyze of just in time situation in cropstand development

• Selection of places for soil & plants evaluations

• Fixing areas for soil profile on big fields – constant conditions for soil characteristic analyzes

Location – Litobratřice 45 km south of Brno

Maize - growing region

An altitude of 210 m

An annual rainfall of 461 mm

Average annual temperature 9-10°C

Soil Type - Degraded Soil

Soil subtype - Modal Chernozem

Clay loamy textured

Medium heavy/Heavy soil

Documenting and evaluation of soilprofile (Dr. Ing. Milan Sáňka, Pedological survey)

Variants of theexperiment

Variant 1: Neosol - Biostimulant - soil activator with higher nutrient utilization

Variant 2: Explorer - Biostimulant - rhizosphere activator

Variant 3: Akeo - 50% Biostimulant nutrient utilization activator, 50% Amofos fertilizer

Variant 4: Control, no biostimulant

Variant 5: Agroptim - Foliar biostimulator

One variant has 3ha, length 850m and width 36m.

Agrotechnics experiment - in prax

➢ Year 2016 preproduction sugar beet

➢ 5. 12. 2016 deep chiseling up to 30cm

➢ March 6, 2017 was seed the spring of wheat, under the heel of 100 kg/ha of NPK ( 15:15:15) was established

➢ March 17, 2017 Application variants biostimulators (150 kg/ha) to soil

➢ Classical agrotechnical interventions

➢ Total precipitation from April to harvest 9.7. only 13mm

Documentation of initiatorysituation - Soil sampling

In the spring at the beginning of the growing season and in the autumn at the end of the growing season

From two depths of profile – topsoil (0-0.2 m) – subsoil (0.2-0.4 m)

Soil sampling

PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL

Moisture

Infiltration

Chlorophyl meter

CHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF SOIL Mehlich III.

Average monthly precipitation Litobratřice 2016-2017

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX: X. XI. XII.

(mm

)

2017 2016

Average monthly total temperature Litobratřice 2016-2017

-10,0

-5,0

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. X. XI. XII¨.

2016 2017

Evaluation of yields results – quantifyingof achieved improvement

Analyze of field productivity

Comparation of reached changes and evaluation ofresults

RESULTS

Physical properties of soil 21.8.2017 - end of the growing season

VariantSoil

depth(m)

Bulk density(g.cm-3)

Totalporosity

(%)

Max. capillarycapacity

Min. airholdingcapacity

% vol.

Neosol0-20 1,21 57,70 40,60 17,10

20-40 1,44 45,00 34,40 10,60

Explorer0-20 1,17 55,31 39,76 15,54

20-40 1,39 47,07 39,10 7,97

Akeo0-20 1,12 57,36 37,79 19,57

20-40 1,43 45,25 34,54 10,71

Control0-20 1,10 57,99 39,61 18,38

20-40 1,39 47,09 37,31 9,78

Agroptim0-20 1,12 57,30 37,60 19,80

20-40 1,39 47,00 35,50 11,50

Var. Neosol: Where Biostimulant was

consumed OSC = increased BD

compared to others.

Variant Soil depth

0-20 20-40

Neosol 24,1 17,7

Explorer 25,29 8,64

Akeo 25,83 6,39

Control 21,24 6,1

Agroptim 27,26 9,75

Moisture 21.8.2017

Control: Soil was more cracked

because it was less structural and

hence larger the proportion of air

and the BD dropped.

Coefficient ofstructurality

Soil Structure

2,12

2,66

4,28

3

3,83

0,831,01

1,96

1,62

1,37

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

3,5

4

4,5

5

Cotrol Neosol Explorer Akeo Agroptim

0-20 20-40

At depth 20-40, confirmation of soil physical parameters positive change followed.

Measurement of soil compaction 24.10. 2017

Control

Siol scanner Topsoil Mapper from Austrian company Geoprospectors.

Chemical properties of soil - 21.8.2017 V

aria

nts

Soil depth(m)

Nutrients

K(mg/kg)

Mg(mg/kg)

P(mg/kg)

Ca(mg/kg)

Nc(%)

Cox(%)

pHKClHumus

%HK/FK

Ne

oso

l 0-20 211 270 102 3581 0,18 1,58 5,8 2,72 1,46

20-40 206 249 99 3557 0,18 1,42 5,9 2,45 1,35

průměr 209 260 101 3569 0,18 1,50 5,9 2,6 1,4

Exp

lore

r 0-20 207 402 108 4145 0,24 1,36 6,8 2,34 2,16

20-40 154 499 89 7089 0,21 1,14 7,0 1,97 1,56

Průměr 181 451 99 5617 0,23 1,25 6,9 2,2 1,9

Ake

o 0-20 186 275 98 7089 0,22 1,46 6,0 2,52 1,27

20-40 161 286 87 3471 0,28 1,37 5,9 2,36 1,36

Průměr 174 281 93 5280 0,25 1,42 6,0 2,4 1,3

Co

ntr

ol 0-20 176 282 94 3509 0,2 1,44 6,0 2,48 1,53

20-40 136 289 84 3612 0,17 1,01 6,5 1,74 0,79

Průměr 156 286 89 3561 0,19 1,23 6,3 2,1 1,2

Agr

op

tim 0-20 171 254 91 3332 0,19 1,28 5,6 2,21 1,43

20-40 139 237 85 3555 0,18 1,29 6,0 2,22 1,71

průměr 155 246 88 3444 0,19 1,29 5,8 2,2 1,6

Chemical properties of soil -

21.8.2017

0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2

Control Neosol Explorer Akeo Agroptim

Cox(%)

HK/FK

0,0

50,0

100,0

150,0

200,0

250,0

174,6

204,5210,5

191,6156,9

196,5

(g)

Kontrola 1 Neosol Explorer Akeo Kontrola 2 Agroptim

Handle Yields Spring Wheat –1m2(g) 3.7.2017

Harvester yields of SpringWheat – 9.7.2017

Harvest

Yield t/ha at 14% moisture

Differnce of control %

Varianta Miosture% Yield kg* Yield t/ha Control 1 Control 2

KONTROLA 1 11,9 862 1,54 1,81 100,00 108,84

NEOSOL 12,2 962 1,72 1,97 108,86 118,48

EXPLORER 12,1 958 1,71 1,98 109,30 118,96

AKEO Fertimix 12,0 932 1,66 1,94 107,22 116,70

KONTROLA 2 11,9 792 1,41 1,66 91,88 100,00

AGROPTIM 11,9 845 1,51 1,78 98,03 106,69

* yield in kg from one traverse at a plot length of 850m and a rail stripe of 7.6m

1,81

1,97 1,981,94

1,661,78

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

Yield t/ha

Kontrola 1 Neosol Explorer Akeo Kontrola Agroptim

The yield of spring wheat

Soil BiostimulantControl

Decrease of soil polyedric agregates

Soil profiles realization 9.11.2017 –documentation

SOIl RPOFILE BIOSTIMULANT

Change of aggregates size and their crumbliness in the zone from 10 to 25 cm.

After application of soil biostimulant are aggregates in zone from 10 to 30 cm more equal in size and bigger part had exposed rounding off edges.

Increased crumbliness became evident not only on aggregates size but also in force required for crushing.

Whole soil profile horizon after biostimulant includes more root residues, as well as the zone of loess.

In the transition zone from 40 cm depth of soil profile treated by biostimulant is more visible progress of organic stabile matters transition to loess layer Confirmation of soil physical parameters positive change followed by more equal movement of water and nutrients in whole profile.

More structural and homogenize soil profile with higher content of roots organic matter and less soil compaction, only natural soil density with slight technogene compaction in the zone from 30 to 40 cm.

First year observation changes after application of biostimulant versus control

Control

SoilBiostimulant

Soil profile CONTROLDefined by greater aggregates sizes with more sharpened edges of polyedric aggregates. Less root system residues and not so intensive transition of organic stabile matters into C - horizon of loess. Transition horizon has more expressive, more sharp color contrast slower enhancing of physiologically usable soil profile.

First year observation changes after applicationof biostimulant versus control

Control

Soilbiostimulant

Earthworms “sleeping“ yet!

This whole system should lead primarily tosustainable management of the soil,stopping the processes of its degradation,reducing the chemical burden on theenvironment and food chains, improvebiodiversity and water management in thesoil and in the landscape.

CONCLUSION

For farmers this will improve the use of nutrients, moreefficient plant protection products and to maintain levels ofproduction while improving the profitability of theproduction.

For soil, for life