Page Banner

United States Department of Agriculture

Agricultural Research Service

Title: Equipment for Soil and Water Conservation in Peanut Production

Authors
item Nuti, Russell
item Truman, Clinton
item Sorensen, Ronald
item Lamb, Marshall

Submitted to: American Peanut Research and Education Society Proceedings
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: June 2, 2008
Publication Date: July 16, 2008
Citation: Nuti, R.C., Truman, C.C., Sorensen, R.B., Lamb, M.C. 2008. Equipment for Soil and Water Conservation in Peanut Production. American Peanut Research and Education Society Proceedings.

Interpretive Summary: none required.

Technical Abstract: Agricultural production in the southeast is traditionally rainfed. Irrigation, when available, is meant to be supplemental to stabilize production during periodic drought. Rainfall during the production season is generally high intensity and is characterized with high rates of runoff and poor infiltration. Improving the efficiency of rainfall capture during the production season will reduce the need for supplemental irrigation preserving fresh water sources and the energy used to apply irrigation. Furrow diking is a cost effective management practice that creates a series of basins and dams in the furrow between crop rows to catch and retain surface applied water (rainfall or irrigation). The objective of this study was to compare furrow diking equipment and soil surface conditions prior to rainfall on the ability to capture water and control erosion characteristics by comparing infiltration, runoff, and soil loss of furrow diked and non-diked tillage systems. In 2005-2007, field studies were established near Dawson, GA with furrow diked and non-diked conventional tilled systems. Simulated rainfall was utilizing on furrow diked and non-diked plots. Runoff and soil loss were measured continuously from each rainfall simulator plot. Furrow diking reduced runoff and soil loss by 3.5 times compared to the non-diked treatment. Furrow diking increased infiltration by 38% resulting in 7 days of estimated plant available water compared to 4 days in the non-diked treatment.

Last Modified: 4/21/2014
Footer Content Back to Top of Page