Integrated crop-livestock systems have been purported to have significant agronomic and environmental benefits compared to specialized, single-enterprise production systems. However, concerns exist regarding the effect of livestock in integrated systems to cause soil compaction, thereby decreasing infiltration of water into soil. Such concerns are compounded by projections of more frequent high-intensity rainfall events from anticipated climate change, which would act to increase surface runoff and soil erosion. A study was conducted to evaluate the effects of residue management, frequency of hoof traffic, season, and production system (e.g., integrated annual cropping versus perennial grass) on infiltration rates from 2001 through 2008 in central North Dakota, USA. Imposed treatments had no effect on infiltration rate at three, six, and nine years after study establishment, implying that agricultural producers should not be concerned with inhibited infiltration in integrated annual cropping systems, where winter grazing is used. The use of no-till management, coupled with annual freeze/thaw and wet/dry cycles, likely conferred an inherent resistance to change in near-surface soil properties affecting soil hydrological attributes. Accordingly, caution should be exercised in applying these results to other regions or management systems. 1. Introduction The sustainability of agricultural production in the northern Great Plains of North America is inextricably linked to the amount and frequency of precipitation. Effective use of precipitation by plants requires the retention and movement of water into the soil, which is affected by vegetative cover and soil structure [1]. Management practices that either remove vegetative cover or deteriorate near-surface soil structure slow infiltration rates [2, 3]. Consequences of slower infiltration rates include greater surface runoff, increased erosion, and decreased on-site productivity. Such outcomes may be exacerbated by projected changes in climate, where a more vigorous hydrological cycle is expected to lead to more frequent high-intensity rainfall events [4]. Accordingly, understanding management effects on infiltration rates is important to ascertain potential off-site environmental impacts as well as long-term consequences to agricultural production. Integrated crop-livestock systems？have been purported to improve agricultural productivity, environmental quality, operational efficiency, and economic performance relative to specialized, single-enterprise production systems [5]. Benefits from crop-livestock
References
[1]
N. C. Brady and R. R. Weil, The Nature and Properties of Soils, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 12th edition, 1999.
[2]
J. L. Pikul and J. K. Aase, “Infiltration and soil properties as affected by annual cropping in the northern Great Plains,” Agronomy Journal, vol. 87, no. 4, pp. 656–662, 1995.
[3]
S. D. Warren, T. L. Thurow, W. H. Blackburn, and N. E. Garza, “The influence of livestock trampling under intensive rotation grazing on soil hydrologic characteristics,” The Journal of Range Management, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 491–495, 1986.
[4]
M. A. Nearing, F. F. Pruski, and M. R. O'Neal, “Expected climate change impacts on soil erosion rates: a review,” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 43–50, 2004.
[5]
M. P. Russelle, M. H. Entz, and A. J. Franzluebbers, “Reconsidering integrated crop-livestock systems in north America,” Agronomy Journal, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. 325–334, 2007.
[6]
R. M. Sulc and B. F. Tracy, “Integrated crop-livestock systems in the U.S. corn belt,” Agronomy Journal, vol. 99, no. 2, pp. 335–345, 2007.
[7]
D. L. Tanaka, J. F. Karn, M. A. Liebig, S. L. Kronberg, and J. D. Hanson, “An integrated approach to crop/livestock systems: forage and grain production for swath grazing,” Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 223–231, 2005.
[8]
J. F. Karn, D. L. Tanaka, M. A. Liebig, R. E. Ries, S. L. Kronberg, and J. D. Hanson, “An integrated approach to crop/livestock systems: wintering beef cows on swathed crops,” Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 232–242, 2005.
[9]
Soil Survey Staff, “Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey,” 2011, http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov.
[10]
M. Sarrantonio, J. W. Doran, M. A. Liebig, and J. J. Halvorson, “On-farm assessment of soil quality and health,” in Methods for Assessing Soil Quality, J. W. Doran and A. J. Jones, Eds., pp. 83–105, Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wis, USA, 1996.
[11]
SAS Institute, SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 6.0, vol. 2, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA, 4th edition, 1990.
[12]
R. C. Littell, G. A. Milliken, W. W. Stroup, and R. D. Wolfinger, SAS System for Mixed Models, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA, 1996.
[13]
D. M. Hershfield, “Rainfall frequency atlas of the United States,” in Weather Bureau technical Paper, vol. 40, US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, USA, 1961.
[14]
W. M. Edwards and L. B. Owens, “Large storm effects on total soil erosion,” Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 75–78, 1991.
[15]
M. A. Liebig, D. L. Tanaka, S. L. Kronberg, E. J. Scholljegerdes, and J. F. Karn, “Integrated crops and livestock in central North Dakota, USA: agroecosystem management to buffer soil change,” Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems. In press.
[16]
E. Mapfumo, D. S. Chanasyk, M. A. Naeth, and V. S. Baron, “Soil compaction under grazing of annual and perennial forages,” Canadian Journal of Soil Science, vol. 79, no. 1, pp. 191–199, 1999.
