Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Applied and Environmental Soil Science
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 654796, 8 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/654796
Research Article

Tillage System Affects Soil Organic Carbon Storage and Quality in Central Morocco

1Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, BP 415, Avenue la Victoire, Rabat, Morocco
2International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, Menzah IV, 2037 Tunis, Tunisia
3Laboratory of Soil Science, Department of Geology and Soil Science (WE13), Ghent University, Krijgslaan 281/S8, 9000 Gent, Belgium

Received 20 May 2014; Accepted 17 August 2014; Published 2 September 2014

Academic Editor: Artemi Cerda

Copyright © 2014 R. Moussadek et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Stabilizing or improving soil organic carbon content is essential for sustainable crop production under changing climate conditions. Therefore, soil organic carbon research is gaining momentum in the Mediterranean basin. Our objective is to quantify effects of no tillage (NT) and conventional tillage (CT) on soil organic carbon stock (SOCs) in three soil types (Vertisol, Cambisol, and Luvisol) within Central Morocco. Chemical analyses were used to determine how tillage affected various humic substances. Our results showed that, after 5 years, surface horizon (0–30 cm) SOC stocks varied between tillage systems and with soil type. The SOCs was significantly higher in NT compared to CT (10% more in Vertisol and 8% more in Cambisol), but no significant difference was observed in the Luvisol. Average SOCs within the 0–30 cm depth was 29.35 and 27.36 Mg ha−1 under NT and CT, respectively. The highest SOCs (31.89 Mg ha−1) was found in Vertisols under NT. A comparison of humic substances showed that humic acids and humin were significantly higher under NT compared to CT, but fulvic acid concentrations were significantly lower. These studies confirm that NT does have beneficial effects on SOCs and quality in these soils.

1. Introduction

Management of soil organic matter (SOM) in arable lands has become increasingly important in many areas of the world in order to combat land degradation [1, 2], increase food security [3, 4], reduce C emissions, and/or mitigate climate change [57]. In fact, soil carbon cycling and composition are essential components of comprehensive agricultural and ecological impacts and forecasting. Bot and Benites [8] have considered SOM as keys to developing drought-resistant soils (i.e., water conservation, evaporation and erosion control, and soil water infiltration ease) and ensuring sustainable food production (crop productivity, fertilizer use efficiency, reduced pesticide use, and crop ecological intensification) [9, 10].

In Morocco, previous investigations have shown that SOM content in most soils is low (<2%) and the decadal average (from 1987 to 1997) loss of the SOM due to intensive land use is about 30% [6]. The decline of SOM in cultivated soil of Morocco, due to the tillage intensification, decreased soil quality and increased the risk of soil degradation [11, 12]. In fact, FAO estimated that 71% of Moroccan agricultural soils are degraded and require conservation measures [8].

To deal with this situation, conservation agriculture has been recommended as an alternative strategy to invert the soil degradation spiral in many parts of the world [1416]. No-tillage systems, which consist of eliminating soil tillage and inversion, maintaining crop residue cover, and ensuring proper crop sequences, have been reported to improve SOM level and ensure carbon accumulation and sequestration in diverse soils from contrasted climate regimes [17]. In the Mediterranean basin, experiences have shown the sustainable use of natural resources through adoption and diffusion of no-tillage systems improves soil quality and enhances crop productivity vis-à-vis climate variability and drought [18, 19]. In other terms, SOM improvement under NT is fundamental for food system in Mediterranean drylands. In Spain, Álvaro-Fuentes et al. [20] showed that no tillage (NT) increases soil organic carbon (SOC) stock in the soil profile (0–40 cm) compared to CT. Similar results were found in Italy [21], in France [22], and in Morocco [2325]. It was also found that, under no-tillage systems, dryland soil can play a part in mitigating CO2 levels [22, 26]. The continuous harvesting of plant materials in conventional tillage system was reported by several authors of decreasing carbon levels in Mediterranean soils and harming its fertility and health [17]. Although most studies reported that no tillage increases SOC storage in the upper soil horizons compared to conventional tillage, other studies reported that SOC content, in deeper horizons, could be similar or even lower under NT than under conventional tillage system [26]. In fact, Franzluebbers [27] reported that SOC stocks depend not only on tillage system, but also on local conditions (soil type and climate).

SOM is a continuum of substances in all stages of decay. Humus is a relatively stable component formed by humic substances, including humic acids, fulvic acids, hymatomelanic acids, and humins [28]. Humic and fulvic substances enhance plant growth directly through physiological and nutritional effects [8] but also improve soil health and quality through amelioration of soil’s physical, biological, and chemical properties. It is evident to account no-tillage systems as durable management practices; they have to improve and protect simultaneously soil organic matter and its active fraction.

Investigations reported that NT systems affect not only the amount of SOM but also its characteristics [29]. Soil organic matter quality is affected by no tillage either in terms of particulate organic matter [24] or in terms of its composition of humic acids, fulvic acids, and humin [30]. These humic substances are involved in improving soil structural stability and plant growth [31].

In Morocco, the effect of no tillage on SOC content has been largely investigated [32], but studies on the potential storage of SOC under NT, taking into account the effect of soil types, have not been carried out yet. Furthermore, effect of tillage systems on humic substances in semiarid Morocco’s environment was not assessed in any previous research. Hence, SOC chemistry remains scarcely studied under tillage systems for the most productive soils in Morocco, as Vertisols. Thus, the objectives of this study are(i)to investigate the effect of NT and CT on the SOC stock (SOCs) in three soil types;(ii)to quantify the effect of NT and CT on the composition of humic substances in Vertisols.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Research Sites, Experimental Set-Up, and Crop Management

This study was conducted at the Merchouch plateau (33°34′ N, 6°42′ W, and 425 m elevation), in Morocco. Its Mediterranean climate is characterised by a mean annual rainfall of 450 mm. Figure 1 shows the monthly time-series (1970–2012) of the average rainfall and temperature and those occurring during the studies period.

654796.fig.001
Figure 1: Monthly average of rainfall and temperature (2011-2012) at Merchouch compared to monthly values of a long term period (1970–2012).

The experiment was established in autumn 2006 after harvest of wheat. Three sites with different soil types were selected. The soils of different sites were classified as Vertisol at site 1, Cambisol at site 2, and Luvisol at site 3, according to the WRB classification [33]. Table 1 summarises the main soil characteristics of the soils at the 3 sites.

tab1
Table 1: Selected soil characteristics at the different sites (Merchouch, Morocco).

Experimental Set-Up. In the three sites, the trials consist of two tillage systems: no-tillage system (NT) and conventional tillage system (CT), performed on two adjacent plots of 200 m long and 100 m wide each. The CT plots were ploughed, according to farmers’ practice in the region, at 30 cm of depth with a “stubble plow” at the end of August each year. For seed-root bed preparation, a pass of a chisel, operated at about 15 cm depth, and two passes with a disc harrow at about 10 cm depth were needed during mid-September. The soil was not disturbed in the plots under NT which were maintained covered with flat and stubble residues at 30% levels. Wheat-lentil rotation was adopted and the crop management was similar in CT and NT treatments. Indeed, winter wheat was sown in mid-November at a 140 kg ha−1 seed rate. In mid-December, lentil was sown at seed rate of 40 kg ha−1. Before sowing, wheat and lentil received a complex fertilizer (14N-28P2O5-14K2O), at a rate of 150 kg ha1 and 100 kg ha−1, respectively. In addition, wheat received 100 kg ha−1 of urea at the end of February. The control of weeds is based primarily on plowing the soil in CT plot before sowing; while in the NT plot this control was achieved by chemical weeding. In fact, for wheat, flumetsulam herbicide was used at a dose of 50 mL−1 ha before sowing. Before lentil seeding, weeds were treated with 3 l ha−1 of Paraquat.

NT and CT lentils were treated with 1 l ha−1 of fluazifop-P-butyl in early February of each season. For wheat, 50 mL ha−1 of flumetsulam was used in early March of each year to control weeds.

After harvest, about 30% of the crop residues were maintained at the surface under no tillage. In fact, to study the effect of residue management on SOCs under NT system, three 1 m2 plots were randomly chosen to harvest in the NT plot in the large plot of 1 ha and the average of residues is calculated per m2 and knowing the amount of residues collected, the mechanical combine harvester was set to leave about 30% of the residues in the large NT plot for wheat crop. For lentil, harvest was done manually and 30% of harvested residues were manually dispersed on the surface of NT plot.

In contrast with NT, in CT plots all crop residues were removed from the field according to the conventional farming practices of this region.

2.2. Soil Sampling and Analysis
2.2.1. Soil Organic Carbon Content

In June of 2012, after wheat harvest, disturbed and undisturbed soil samples were taken for determination of the SOC content (SOCc) and bulk density, respectively, and at the same time. The soil samples were collected in three different sites at four depths (0–5, 5–10, 10–20, and 20–30 cm) in the NT and CT plots with three replicates per treatment. We selected to use those four depths in this study because studying the effect of soil management on SOC using the entire soil profile can be more complicated and needs a long term SOC monitoring [34].

Immediately after sampling, the disturbed soil samples were dry sieved at 2 mm to remove plant debris. The SOC content was determined indirectly by oxidation of organic carbon following the classical method of Walkley and Black [35]. The organic matter content is estimated by multiplying the SOC content by a correction factor of 1.724. Concerning the soil bulk density (), intact soil cores of 200 cm3 in metal sleeves were collected using a hammer-driven core sampler for the determination of dry bulk density as described by Grossman and Reinsch [36] (Table 1).

2.2.2. Humic Substances

To study the effect of tillage practices on humic substances, soil samples were collected randomly from the Vertisol at 0–20 cm depth in the NT and CT plots with three replicates per treatment in mid-season (March 2012).

Extraction of humic substances was done using the alkaline solvents method [37]. The fine fraction (<50 μm) was treated with 0.1 M sodium pyrophosphate at pH 9.8. From these alkaline substances, separated by centrifugation, the dispersed organomineral colloids were deflocculated with 4% KCl and mixed with insoluble soil residues. The residues were then treated with 0.1 N sodium hydroxide at pH 12 using the same protocol [38].

The pyrophosphate and NaOH extracts were mixed. The humic and fulvic acids were separated by acidification to a pH 1.5.

2.2.3. Calculation of Soil Organic Carbon Stock (SOCs)

The stock of soil organic carbon (SOCs) was expressed using the following equation [39]: where SOCs is the soil organic carbon stock (kg C m2), is the bulk density (Mg m−3) of layer , SOCci is the proportion of soil organic carbon content (g C g−1) in layer i, and is the layer depth (m).

2.3. Statistical Analysis

The effects of tillage system on the SOCc, SOCs, and humic substances were tested in the different soil types using SPSS version 17. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to determine significance of tillage effects in each soil type and t-test (Student’s t-test) was applied for comparing treatment means.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Soil Organic Carbon Content (SOCc)

Our results showed that SOCc near the surface (0–10 cm) was significantly higher under NT compared to CT for the three soil types (Figure 2), confirming the results obtained by other authors under semiarid Mediterranean conditions [20, 32, 40, 41]. The reduction of SOCc in conventionally tilled soil could be explained by the excessive removal of biomass after harvest and higher decomposition rate due to increased microbial activity at the soil surface [42, 43]. At 10–20 cm depth, except in Luvisol, SOCc was significantly higher in NT than CT. However, in the deepest horizon (20–30 cm), no significant difference of SOCc has been observed between the CT and NT systems. The same findings under similar semiarid Mediterranean conditions were reported by Murillo et al. [44], Moreno et al. [45], and Lozano-García and Parras-Alcántara [46].

654796.fig.002
Figure 2: Soil organic carbon content (SOCc) and bulk density () in three soil types after 5 years under NT and CT. At each depth, () means the presence of significant differences between treatments (LSD test, ). The error bar represents one standard error.

Although under semiarid climatic conditions the potential for C sequestration into deep soil horizons is generally restricted, a slight increase of SOCc in the surface layer is essential to control erosion, water infiltration, and conservation of nutrients and is related with the soil quality [47].

3.2. Soil Organic Carbon Storage (SOCs)

Figure 2 shows higher soil under NT than under CT, especially in the top soil (except for Luvisol). Similar results were reported in numerous studies, which showed that bulk density increases in the few years after NT introduction [4850].

Several authors suggest that this increase in Db under NT will be reduced with time following increases in soil biological activity [5153].

Table 2 shows the SOCs in all layers for both tillage systems under the three soil types. The analysis of variance indicated significant higher SOCs under NT compared to CT in both 0–5 and 5–10 cm layers under the three soil types. Considering the average SOCs at 0–30 cm depth, NT had significant higher SOCs than CT under Vertisol and Cambisol; however no significant difference was observed between the two tillage systems under Luvisol. The SOCs (0–30 cm) average was 29.35 and 27.36 Mg ha−1 under NT and CT, respectively, with a maximum of 31.89 Mg ha−1 observed in NT under Vertisol (Table 2).

tab2
Table 2: Soil organic carbon storage (SOCs) (Mg·ha−1) in three sites under no tillage (NT) and conventional tillage (CT) in Merchouch, Morocco.

This result indicated that after five years of continuous NT the topsoil (0–30 cm) SOCs increased by 10% in the Vertisol, 8% in the Cambisol, and 2% in Luvisol compared to CT. This is consistent with the results of Ben Moussa-Machraoui et al. [54] who observed an improvement of 12% of SOCs in a Tunisian Cambisol after 4 years of NT compared to CT.

Similarly, [18] observed a significant increase in SOCs of a Vertisol after 4 years of NT compared to CT in semiarid Morocco. In a long term study, [24] reported that SOCs in Vertisol was 13.6% higher under NT than under CT after 11 years under drier conditions compared to our study area.

In contrast, we did not observe a significant effect of NT on (0–30 cm) SOCs in the Luvisol, compared to CT. This is in agreement with results reported by Virto et al. [55] and Thomas et al. [56] in a Luvisol under semiarid climate. The higher C sequestration potential under NT of Vertisols and Cambisols versus Luvisols can be explained by differences in their texture. Several researchers have shown that fine-textured soils have a greater potential to sequester carbon than coarse-textured soils [5, 57, 58]. In fact, SOCs is higher in soils with fine texture due to the stabilizing properties that clay has on organic matter which could be trapped in the very small spaces between clay particles reducing the accessibility of the microorganisms and therefore slowing SOC decomposition. This is the mediated aggregation process by carbon accumulation as explained by Six et al. [59]. Many authors reported that soils with high clay content tend to have higher SOC than soils with low clay content under similar land use and climate conditions [27, 60].

In this sense, [61] described Vertisols as “active” soils in NT due to the high amount of clay which could improve soil organic carbon content.

Concerning the organic carbon storage, SOCs varied between 31.9 Mg·ha−1 and 25.8 Mg·ha−1 under NT, while, in tilled treatments, SOCs ranged between 28.8 Mg·ha−1 and 24.8 Mg·ha−1. These values were lower than those observed by Fernández-Ugalde et al. [62] who found, in silty clay soil, a SOCs at 0–30 cm of 50.9 Mg·ha−1 after 7 years of no tillage, which was significantly higher than the 44.1 Mg·ha−1 under CT under wheat-barley cropping system in semiarid area in Spain. In the same Mediterranean climate, Hernanz et al. [63] found, after 11 years under NT, a SOCs of 37 Mg·ha−1 which was higher than 33.5 Mg·ha−1 under CT, using a wheat-vetch (Vectoria sativa L.) rotation in silty soil. The lower SOCs values we observed can be explained by the fact that more time is needed before achieving the peak sequestration rate under NT. According to West and Post [64], this peak could be reached within 5–10 years after the introduction of NT.

3.3. Humic Substances

According to Figure 3, the organic matter under NT was composed of significantly higher amounts of humic acids (HA) and humin (HU) and lower amounts of fulvic acids (FA) compared to CT in Vertisol. This is consistent with results obtained by Szajdak et al. [65]. The relative decrease in FA under NT compared to CT was probably due to the humification process which was favored by residue management under NT and resulted in a significant increase of the most stable fraction (HA and HU) [66].

654796.fig.003
Figure 3: Humic substances in Vertisol under NT and CT (FA: fulvic acid; HA: humic acid; HU: humin), for each of the substances (treatments with the same letter are not significantly different (Student’s t-test with )).

Blanco-Canqui and Lal [67] reported that the increases of the humic acids are particularly involved in aggregate stabilization more than fulvic acid. According to Piccolo et al. [68], additional HA serve to bond particles together and can be adsorbed onto clay particles by polyvalent cations, making them especially effective in reducing clay dispersion, improving soil water content, and reducing soil erosion [69]. In fact, in the studied Vertisol, positive effects of NT on aggregate stability and soil water content have been reported in a previous study by Moussadek et al. [25].

4. Conclusions

The introduction of no tillage (NT) in wheat-based systems of Central Morocco could be an alternative for improving soil quality. After five years of NT, a significant increase in soil organic carbon (SOC) was found compared to CT for two major soils (Vertisol and Cambisol). SOC stock increased from 2% to 10%, depending on the soil type. Indeed, Vertisols or similar clay soils in general are able to store more SOC under NT along the profile than coarse textured soil. This accumulation of organic carbon resulted in increased levels of humic acids and humin in Vertisol under NT compared to CT. The obtained result shows that NT can contribute to the improvement of soil quality in semiarid Mediterranean conditions.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of ICARDA (INRM project) and the support of Ghent University (Belgium).

References

  1. R. Lal, “Enhancing crop yields in the developing countries through restoration of the soil organic carbon pool in agricultural lands,” Land Degradation and Development, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 197–209, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. J. Lieskovský and P. Kenderessy, “Modelling the effect of vegetation cover and different tillage practices on soil erosion in vineyards: a case study in vráble (Slovakia) using watem/sedem,” Land Degradation and Development, vol. 25, pp. 288–296, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. M. S. Swaminathan, “Science in response to basic human needs,” Science, vol. 287, no. 5452, p. 425, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. P. A. Sanchez and M. S. Swaminathan, “Cutting world hunger in half,” Science, vol. 307, no. 5708, pp. 357–359, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. R. Lal, “Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change,” Geoderma, vol. 123, no. 1-2, pp. 1–22, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. V. Barbera, I. Poma, L. Gristina, A. Novara, and M. Egli, “Long-term cropping systems and tillage management effects on soil organic carbon stock and steady state level of C sequestration rates in a semiarid environment,” Land Degradation and Development, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 82–91, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. F. García-Orenes, C. Guerrero, A. Roldán et al., “Soil microbial biomass and activity under different agricultural management systems in a semiarid Mediterranean agroecosystem,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 109, no. 2, pp. 110–115, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. A. Bot and J. Benites, “The importance soil organic matter: key to drought-resistant soil sustained food production,” FAO Soils Bulletin, vol. 80, 2005. View at Google Scholar
  9. B. Lozano-García and L. Parras-Alcántara, “Variation in soil organic carbon and nitrogen stocks along a toposequence in a traditional Mediterranean olive grove,” Land Degradation and Development, vol. 25, pp. 297–304, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  10. C. H. Srinivasarao, B. Venkateswarlu, R. Lal et al., “Long-term manuring and fertilizer effects on depletion of soil organic stocks under Pearl millet-cluster vean -castor rotation in Western india,” Land Degradation and Development, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 173–183, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. B. Soudi, C. N. Chiang, H. Berdai, and F. Naaman, “Statut du cycle de lazote et de la matière organique en zones semi-arides irriguées et dagriculture pluviale,” Revue H.T.E 127, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  12. R. Mrabet, K. Ibno-Namr, F. Bessam, and N. Saber, “Soil chemical quality changes and implications for fertilizer management after 11 years of no-tillage wheat production systems in Semiarid Morocco,” Land Degradation and Development, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 505–517, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. Soil Conservation Service, vol. 18, Survey Staff, Soil Survey Manual, U.S. Department of Agriculture Handbook, 1993.
  14. R. Derpsch and T. Friedrich, “Global overview of conservation agriculture adoption,” in Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Conservation Agriculture, pp. 429–438, New Delhi, India, February 2009.
  15. G. Zhao, X. Mu, Z. Wen, F. Wang, and P. Gao, “Soil erosion, conservation, and Eco-environment changes in the Loess Plateau of China,” Land Degradation & Development, vol. 24, pp. 499–510, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  16. A. Tesfaye, W. Negatu, R. Brouwer, and P. Van der Zaag, “Understanding soil conservation decision of farmers in the gedeb watershed, ethiopia,” Land Degradation and Development, vol. 25, pp. 71–79, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. A. Kassam, T. Friedrich, R. Derpsch et al., “Conservation agriculture in the dry Mediterranean climate,” Field Crops Research, vol. 132, pp. 7–17, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. R. Mrabet, “Mediterranean conservation agriculture. A paradigm for cropping systems,” in Proceedings of the 16th Triennial Conference of International Soil Tillage Research Organization (ISTRO '03), pp. 774–779, Brisbane, Australia, July 2003.
  19. R. Mrabet, “Climate change and carbon sequestration in the Mediterranean basin. Contributions of no-tillage systems,” Options Méditerranéennes, vol. 96, pp. 165–184, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  20. J. Álvaro-Fuentes, M. V. López, C. Cantero-Martinez, and J. L. Arrúe, “Tillage effects on soil organic carbon fractions in Mediterranean dryland agroecosystems,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 72, no. 2, pp. 541–547, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. F. Basso, M. Pissante, and B. Basso, “Soil erosion and land degradation,” in Mediterranean Desertification. A Mosaic of Processes and Responses, N. A. Geeson, C. J. Brandt, and J. B. Thornes, Eds., pp. 347–359, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  22. K. Oorts, H. Bossuyt, J. Labreuche, R. Merckx, and B. Nicolardot, “Carbon and nitrogen stocks in relation to organic matter fractions, aggregation and pore size distribution in no-tillage and conventional tillage in northern France,” European Journal of Soil Science, vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 248–259, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. Mrabet, Crop residue management and tillage systems for water conservation in a semiarid area of Morocco [Ph.D. dissertation], Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colo, USA, 1997.
  24. R. Mrabet, N. Saber, A. El-Brahli, S. Lahlou, and F. Bessam, “Total, particulate organic matter and structural stability of a Calcixeroll soil under different wheat rotations and tillage systems in a semiarid area of Morocco,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 225–235, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. R. Moussadek, R. Mrabet, P. Zante et al., “Influence du semis direct et des résidus de culture sur l’érosion hydrique d’un Vertisol Méditerranéen,” Canadian Journal of Soil Science, vol. 91, no. 4, pp. 627–635, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  26. R. Mrabet, “Soil quality and carbon sequestration. Impacts of no-tillage systems,” Options Méditerranéennes, vol. 65, pp. 45–60, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  27. A. J. Franzluebbers, “Tillage and residue management effect on soil organic matter,” in Soil Organic Matter in Sustainable Agriculture, F. Magdoff and R. R. Weil, Eds., pp. 227–268, CRC Press, Boca Raton, Fla, USA, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  28. K. H. Tan, Environmental Soil Science, Marcel Dekker, New York, NY, USA, 1994.
  29. G. Ding, J. M. Novak, D. Amarasiriwardena, P. G. Hunt, and B. Xing, “Soil organic matter characteristics as affected by tillage management,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 421–429, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. D. L. McCallister and W. L. Chien, “Organic carbon quantity and forms as influenced by tillage and cropping sequence,” Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, vol. 31, no. 3-4, pp. 465–479, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. R. Madrid, M. Valverde, I. Guillén, A. Sanchez, and A. Lax, “Evolution of organic matter added to soils under cultivation conditions,” Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science, vol. 167, no. 1, pp. 39–44, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. R. Mrabet, No-Tillage Systems for Sustainable Dry Land Agriculture in Morocco, INRA Publication, Fanigraph edition, 2008.
  33. WRB, World Reference Base for Soil Resources, World Soil Resources Reports No. 103, FAO, Rome, Italy, 2nd edition, 2006.
  34. L. Parras-Alcántara, M. Martín-Carrillo, and B. Lozano- García, “Impacts of land use change in soil carbon and nitrogen in a Mediterranean agricultural area (Southern Spain),” Solid Earth, vol. 4, pp. 167–177, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  35. A. Walkley and I. A. Black, “An examination of Degtjareff method for determining soil organic matter, and a proposed modification of the chromic acid titration method,” Soil Science, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 29–38, 1934. View at Google Scholar
  36. R. B. Grossman and T. G. Reinsch, “Bulk density and linear extensibility,” in Methods of Soil Analysis: Part 4, Physical Methods, J. H. Dane and G. C. Topp, Eds., SSSA Book Series, pp. 201–228, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wis, USA, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  37. A. Piccolo, “Characteristics of soil humic matter addition by caulescent Andean rosettes on surficial soil,” Geoderma, vol. 54, pp. 151–171, 1988. View at Google Scholar
  38. B. Dabin, “Méthode d'extraction et de fractionnement des matières humiques du sol: application à quelques études pédologiques et agronomiques dans les sols tropicaux,” Cahiers ORSTOM, Série Pédologie, vol. 14, pp. 287–297, 1976. View at Google Scholar
  39. M. Bernoux, M. D. C. S. Carvalho, B. Volkoff, and C. C. Cerri, “Brazil's soil carbon stocks,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 888–896, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. P. Bescansa, M. J. Imaz, I. Virto, A. Enrique, and W. B. Hoogmoed, “Soil water retention as affected by tillage and residue management in semiarid Spain,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 19–27, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. L. López-Bellido, F. J. López-Garrido, M. Fuentes, J. E. Castillo, and E. J. Fernández, “Influence of tillage, crop rotation and nitrogen fertilization on soil organic matter and nitrogen under rain-fed Mediterranean conditions,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 43, no. 3-4, pp. 277–293, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  42. D. L. Karlen, N. C. Wollenhaupt, D. C. Erbach et al., “Crop residue effects on soil quality following 10-years of no-till corn,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 31, no. 2-3, pp. 149–167, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  43. R. A. Drijber, J. W. Doran, A. M. Parkhurst, and D. J. Lyon, “Changes in soil microbial community structure with tillage under long-term wheat-fallow management,” Soil Biology and Biochemistry, vol. 32, no. 10, pp. 1419–1430, 2000. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  44. J. M. Murillo, F. Moreno, F. Pelegrín, and J. E. Fernández, “Responses of sunflower to traditional and conservation tillage under rainfed conditions in southern Spain,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 233–241, 1998. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  45. F. Moreno, J. M. Murillo, F. Pelegrín, and I. F. Girón, “Long-term impact of conservation tillage on stratification ratio of soil organic carbon and loss of total and active CaCO3,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 85, no. 1-2, pp. 86–93, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  46. B. Lozano-García and L. Parras-Alcántara, “Land use and management effects on carbon and nitrogen in Mediterranean Cambisols,” Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, vol. 179, pp. 208–214, 2013. View at Google Scholar
  47. A. J. Franzluebbers, F. M. Hons, and D. A. Zuberer, “Tillage and crop effects on seasonal dynamics of soil CO2 evolution, water content, temperature, and bulk density,” Applied Soil Ecology, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 95–109, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  48. D. K. Cassel, C. W. Raczkowski, and H. P. Denton, “Tillage effects on corn production and soil physical conditions,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 59, no. 5, pp. 1436–1443, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  49. A. J. Franzluebbers, “Soil organic matter stratification ratio as an indicator of soil quality,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 95–106, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  50. J. Lampurlanés and C. Cantero-Martínez, “Soil bulk density and penetration resistance under different tillage and crop management systems and their relationship with barley root growth,” Agronomy Journal, vol. 95, no. 3, pp. 526–536, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  51. L. R. Drees, A. D. Karathanasis, L. P. Wilding, and R. L. Blevins, “Micromorphological characteristics of long-term no-till and conventionally tilled soils,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 508–517, 1994. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  52. A. Jordán, L. M. Zavala, and J. Gil, “Effects of mulching on soil physical properties and runoff under semi-arid conditions in southern Spain,” Catena, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 77–85, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  53. R. Mrabet, R. Moussadek, A. Fadlaoui, and E. van Ranst, “Conservation agriculture in dry areas of Morocco,” Field Crops Research, vol. 132, pp. 84–94, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  54. S. Ben Moussa-Machraoui, F. Errouissi, M. Ben-Hammouda, and S. Nouira, “Comparative effects of conventional and no-tillage management on some soil properties under Mediterranean semi-arid conditions in northwestern Tunisia,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 106, no. 2, pp. 247–253, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  55. I. Virto, M. J. Imaz, A. Enrique, W. Hoogmoed, and P. Bescansa, “Burning crop residues under no-till in semi-arid land, Northern Spain: effects on soil organic matter, aggregation, and earthworm populations,” Australian Journal of Soil Research, vol. 45, no. 6, pp. 414–421, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  56. G. A. Thomas, R. C. Dalal, and J. Standley, “No-till effects on organic matter, pH, cation exchange capacity and nutrient distribution in a Luvisol in the semi-arid subtropics,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 94, no. 2, pp. 295–304, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  57. J. Hassink, “Decomposition rate constants of size and density fractions of soil organic matter,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 59, no. 6, pp. 1631–1635, 1995. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  58. B. A. Needelman, M. M. Wander, G. A. Bollero, C. W. Boast, G. K. Sims, and D. G. Bullock, “Interaction of tillage and soil texture: biological active soil organic matter in Illinois,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 63, no. 5, pp. 1326–1334, 1999. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  59. J. Six, C. Feller, K. Denef, S. M. Ogle, J. C. de Moraes Sa, and A. Albrecht, “Soil organic matter, biota and aggregation in temperate and tropical soils—effects of no-tillage,” Agronomie, vol. 22, no. 7-8, pp. 755–775, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  60. L. Parras-Alcántara, L. Díaz-Jaimes, and B. Lozano-García, “Management effects on soil organic carbon stock in Mediterranean open rangelands—treeless grasslands,” Land Degradation & Development, 2014. View at Google Scholar
  61. R. Lal, “Conservation tillage for sustainablc agriculture,” Advances in Agronomy, vol. 42, pp. 185–197, 1988. View at Google Scholar
  62. O. Fernández-Ugalde, I. Virto, P. Bescansa, M. J. Imaz, A. Enrique, and D. L. Karlen, “No-tillage improvement of soil physical quality in calcareous, degradation-prone, semiarid soils,” Soil and Tillage Research, vol. 106, no. 1, pp. 29–35, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  63. J. L. Hernanz, V. Sánchez-Girón, and L. Navarrete, “Soil carbon sequestration and stratification in a cereal/leguminous crop rotation with three tillage systems in semiarid conditions,” Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment, vol. 133, no. 1-2, pp. 114–122, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  64. T. O. West and G. Post, “Soil organic carbon sequestration rates by tillage and crop rotation: a global data analysis,” Soil Science Society of America Journal, vol. 66, no. 6, pp. 1930–1946, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  65. L. Szajdak, A. Jezierski, and M. L. Cabrera, “Impact of conventional and no-tillage management on soil amino acids, stable and transient radicals and properties of humic and fulvic acids,” Organic Geochemistry, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 693–700, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  66. M. G. González, M. E. Conti, R. M. Palma, and N. M. Arrigo, “Dynamics of humic fractions and microbial activity under no-tillage or reduced tillage, as compared with native pasture (Pampa Argentina),” Biology and Fertility of Soils, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 135–138, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  67. H. Blanco-Canqui and R. Lal, “Mechanisms of carbon sequestration in soil aggregates,” Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences, vol. 23, no. 6, pp. 481–504, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  68. A. Piccolo, G. Pietramellara, and J. S. C. Mbagwu, “Use of humic substances as soil conditioners to increase aggregate stability,” Geoderma, vol. 75, no. 3-4, pp. 267–277, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  69. J. Balesdent, “Un point sur l'évolution des réserves organiques des sols de France,” Etude et Gestion des Sols, vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 245–260, 1996. View at Google Scholar