No Tillage Field Trials in lower Austria

General

National Id

Austria_02

Site name

Several testing areas: Tulln (Coordinates given for Tulln, Mistelbach is more in the norteast), Mistelbach, Pyhra

Summary

In the framework of a research programme, no tillage field trials have been installed in lower Austria. They showed a significant reduction of runoff, as well as a reduced loss of nutrients. In addition, reduced or no tillage leads to less loss of soil, and an increased content of organic carbon in the soil.

Light or indepth?

Light

NUTS Code

Niederösterreich

RBD code

AT1000

Transboundary

Data provider

Sabine Tutte, ACTeon

Source(s)

Minimum Tillage Field Trials in Lower Austria

conserving soil treatment systems- trials in Lower Austria

Telephone -Interview with PhD Josef Rosner

Economic aspects of mulch and direct seeding- reduction of soil treatment, which changes in the operational result have to be expected?

NWRM(s) implemented in the case study

Green cover

No till agriculture

Low till agriculture

Longitude

16.060686

Latitude

48.331585

Site information

Climate zone

warm temperate dry

Mean rainfall

550

Mean rainfall unit

mm/year

Average temperature

9,2

Type

Actual Test Site

Average slope range

5-16%

Vegetation class

Agricultural fields, where corn, wheat, barley and sugar beet are grown.

Monitoring maintenance

Monitoring impacts effects

Monitoring location

Edge of Field/Plot

Monitoring parameters

Quantity of soil eroded, runoff (seasonally), composition of the eroded material, runoff (N, herbicides...).

Performance

Performance impact estimation method

Laboratory

Performance impact estimation information

Three different testing fields: direct comparison of no tillage, reduced tillage and conventional tillage.

Design & implementations

Application scale

Field Scale

Installation date

2003

Age

Performance timescale

5 - 10 years

Area (ha)

0,00600000005215406

Size

Size unit

Design capacity description

Cannot be said in general.

Basis of design

Testing fields for different soil treating techniques (no tillage, reduced tillage and conventional tillage).

Constraints

Green bridge of volunteer cereals is able to transfer pathogens, with less soil treatment there is a higher risk that there is a higher amount of mykotoxins.

Favourable preconditions

medium-heavy soils, few weeds

Crop rotation

1.corn- winter wheat
2. corn-winter wheat- sugar beet- summer barley
3. sunflower-winter wheat

Contractural arrangements

Design contractual arrangement

Arrangement type	Responsibility	Role	Comments	Name

Design consultation activity

Activity stage	Key issues	Name	Comments
Other	alternative tillage machines were demonstrated to farmers, sensibilisation for erosion problems	Tillage demonstration events

Design land use change

Land use change type

Design authority

Authority type	Role	Name	Comments
Other	Other	Lower Austrian State Government	Regulatory frame work as the law on soil protection and the environmental programme ÖPUL (subsidies)
	Initiation of the measure	local communities	Supprot research on alternative soil treatment techniques since less erosion means less maintenance costs for drainage and sewage water systems
Farmers	Implementation	local farmers	Soil is their most valuable good. Protection of soil means cost savings for fertilizers and constant yield

Lessons, risks, implications...

Key lessons

Significant reduction of runoff, loss of nutrients, soil and pesticides is possible.
Mulch and direct seeding practices are fully developped and work well in practice.
The economic benefits must not ignore erosion, nutrient and pesticide movement.
Volunteer plants can be a bridge for plant diseases.
Cover crops should be sown immediately after harvesting for building up a green manure.
Cost reduction is possible.

Financing mechanism

Financing mechanism information

There is support on research by the state of Lower Austria. Farmers get subsidies for soil protection measures, such as constant green cover and reduced tillage by the federal government of Austria

Financing difficulties

Success factor(s)

Success factor type	Success factor role	Comments
Attitude of decision makers	main factor
Attitude of the public	main factor
Attitude of relevant stakeholders	main factor

Financing

Financing type	Comments
Sub-national funds	The research programme is financed by the state government of lower Austria.
National funds	Subsidies are financed by the federal government of Austria.

Barrier

Barrier type	Barrier role	Comments
Other	secondary barrier	Not all crops show an increased yield with less soil treatment, such as sugar beet.
Other	secondary barrier	Volunteer crops can act as a bridge for pathogens.
Other	main barrier	Reduced tillage cannot be used on heavy soils

Driver

Driver type	Driver role	Comments
Legal obligations	main driver	The law of soil protection of Lower Austria encourages reduced tillage practices.
Organisation committed to it	main driver	They are constantly searching for new soil treatment techniques and try to introduce them in agricultural practice.
Availability of subsidies	main driver	Austrian Environmental Programme: Farmers receive the more subsidies the longer they have a green cover on the field. Moreover, mulchseeding and CO2 storage in soil are awarded as maximum soil protection measures.

Financing share

Financing share type	Share	Comments

Policy, general governance and design targets

Policy description

Reducing tillage in order to decrease erosion, loss of nutrients and pesticides and increase the amount of humus.

Part of wider plan

Policy target

Target purpose
Runoff control
Erosion Control
Improved Biodiversity

Policy pressure

Pressure directive	Relevant pressure

Policy area

Policy area type	Policy area focus	Name	Comments

Policy impact

Impact directive	Relevant impact

Policy wider plan

Wider plan type	Wider plan focus	Name	Comments

Policy requirement directive

Requirement directive	Specification

Socio-economic

Direct benefits

416

Direct benefits information

Biedermann calculated for corn possible savings of 416 €/ha, which means 43€/t. By reducing tillage, a farm can save up to 10 000 €. When tillage is completely abandoned, savings up to 24 000 € are possible. Reasons for this are: less working hours (5 €/t wheat for salary instead of 14), less fuel consumption (40 l/ha instead of 96), less fixed machine costs. The additional consumption of herbicides and fertilizers is easily compensated and included in the calculations.

Costs investment

Costs investment information

Biedermann made its economical monitoring for 100 ha agricultural holding with different crops: winter wheat, winter barley, winter canola, corn, sugar beet and cover plants. He calculated the "cost for doing work" that means: salary (12 €/h), variable costs for machines (fuel, maintenance), fixed cost for machines (interest, depletion, assurance) and means of production (fertilizer, herbicides). When tillage is reduced the farmer should consider selling some of his tractors and increase the operating grade of his machines. The seeding machine is very expensive and in the same time a key element. The farmer should consider to buy it either used, to outsource the seeding or to use it in cooperation with other farmers. As an example, the costs are given here for direct seeding of wheat with a corn yield of 6t/ha.

Costs capital

Costs capital information

Salary of the farmer

Costs land acquisition information

Normally no land needs to be purchased

Costs operation maintenance

33,75

Costs operation maintenance

In his calculations, Biedermann considered an additional consumption of herbicides (18 € per ha) and fertilizers (15 kg N/ha í 1,05 €/kg) for direct seeding.

Costs operational

Costs operational information

Variable machine costs

Costs maintenance

Costs maintenance information

Means of production (including the additional consumption of herbicides and fertilizers).

Costs total

119

Costs total information

These are the "costs for doing work". With direct seeding the farmer saves 37 €/t compared to conventional tillage. When mulchseeding is done in an cooperation savings are 19 €/t and mulchseeding with own machines leads to an saving of 10€/t.

Ecosystem improved biodiversity

Information on Ecosystem improved biodiversity

When no tillage is applied, the number of earthworms is multiplied by 5. The symbiosis between roots and rhizobiaceae is improved as well. Moreover, the plant roots are able to create a more complex horizontal and vertical network.

Ecosystem provisioning services

Information on Ecosystem provisioning services

In the first years when reduced tillage measures are applied, there can be less yield of crops on the fields. However, this is often balanced since there are less expenses for fuel, and less working time needed.

Ecosystem impact climate regulation

Impact on GHGs (net emissions and storage) including soil carbon

Information on Ecosystem impact climate regulation

Increase of soil carbon, less CO2 emissions.

Ecosystem impact Green House Gas (GHG) soil carbon

Information on Ecosystem impact GHG soil carbon

CO2 emission from soil

Biophysical impacts

Information on increased water storage

Depending on the testing site, 16% more in Mistelbach, 56% more in Pixendorf and 95% more in Tulln (close to Pixendorf).

Ecosystem impact, reduced energy use

Information on Ecosystem impact reduced energy use

Ecosystem impact other GHG

Information on Ecosystem impact other GHG

More CH4 uptake

Ecosys impact increased permanent biomas

500

Information on Ecosystem impact increased permanent biomass

More earthworms

Ecosystem erosion control

Water quality overall improvements

Positive impact-WQ improvement

Ecosystem erosion control impact

Information on Water quality overall improvements

When tillage is reduced or completely abandoned, the loss of nitrogen and sprayed herbicides decreases.

Information on Ecosystem erosion control impact

Per ha and year

Water quality Improvements Nitrogen (N)

Wq Improvements n unit

% reduction pf pollutant

Soil quality overall soil improvements

Positive impact-SQ improvement

Information on Soil quality overall soil improvements

Due to reduced / no tillage, there is less soil loss, more organic carbon in the soil, less CO2 emission and more CH4 uptake in the soil.

Soil quality, overall soil pollution

Soil quality, overall soil pollution unit

% Reduction

Information on Soil quality overall soil pollution

CO2 emission

Information on Soil quality overall soil carbon

32 % more CH4 uptake in the soil.

Soil quality, overall soil nutrients

Soil quality, overall soil nutrients, unit

% Reduction

Information on Soil quality overall soil nutrients

Soil loss

Soil quality, overall soil physical properties

Soil quality, overall soil physical properties, unit

% Reduction

Information on Soil quality, overall soil physical properties

Loss of organic carbon

Full Context

Collection(aka Doorway or Gallery)

Case Studies

Pathway(aka Context)

Default view

Area(aka Level or Site)

ALL