Cover Crops Can Improve Potato Tuber Yield and Quality
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
type of potato cultivar. In other words, Cover Crops Can Improve Potato Tuber in cases where the amount of N is in- Yield and Quality creased to higher levels than needed, a negative effect could then be ob- served (Essah and Delgado, 2009). Samuel Y.C. Essah1,5, Jorge A. Delgado2, Merlin Dillon3, Further, when N is applied in better and Richard Sparks4 synchronization with the N demands of a given potato cultivar (and the N that is cycled is accounted for when ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS. tuber size distribution, tuber external defects applying N), tuber yields could be in- creased (Essah and Delgado, 2009). UMMARY Solanum tuberosum S . There is the need to develop potato ( ) cropping Since cover crops have the potential systems with higher yields and crop quality. Field studies were conducted with cover crops grown under limited irrigation (<8 inches) to assess the effects of certain types to affect the N balance of the follow- of cover crops on potato tuber yield and quality. On a commercial farm operation ing crop (Delgado, 1998; Delgado before the 2006 and 2007 potato season, mustard (Brassica sp.), canola (Brassica et al., 2001, 2010), this could be one napus), and two cultivars of sorghum-sudangrass (Sorghum bicolor · S. sudanense) of the factors that could potentially were planted. A wet fallow ground treatment where no cover crop was planted was contribute to effects on tuber yields used as a control. Before the 2008 season, barley (Hordeum vulgare), barley plus and quality (Delgado et al., 2007; applied compost, sunflower (Helianthus annus), pea (Pisum sativum), and annual Essah and Delgado, 2009). ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) cover crops were added. The results of these 2006– Cover crops can be good soil scav- 08 studies showed that cover crops have the potential to increase potato tuber yield engers of N and they can cycle signifi- and quality, as measured by tuber size (larger tubers) and appearance (e.g., tubers cant amounts of the recovered N with reduced defects such as cracks, knobs, and misshapes). In 2 of the 3 years, most of the cover crops, especially sorghum-sudangrass, increased yields and tuber to the following crop (Collins et al., quality. Positive results from sorghum-sudangrass suggest there is potential to 2007; Delgado et al., 2004, 2010; harvest hay from cover crops and still obtain tuber benefits. Seo et al., 2006; Varco et al., 1989). Vyn et al. (2000) conducted studies in Canada and found that cover crops, here have been reports of cover potato tuber yields were slightly lower such as annual ryegrass, oat, oilseed crops increasing the yield of the following legumes. radish (Raphanus sativus), or even red Tfollowing crops (Clark, 2007; Results from studies conducted clover, could serve as scavenger crops Dabney et al., 2010; Delgado et al., by Sincik et al. (2008) indicated that that can recover residual soil nitrate 2007). However, there is a need for potato following legume cover crops and potentially cycle it to the follow- additional research on the potential produced 36% to 38% higher tuber ing crop. benefits that cover crops may have on yields compared with potato follow- Delgado et al. (2007) reported the yields of the following potato crop. ing winter wheat (Triticum aestivum) other benefits from summer cover crops There have been studies on the when zero N was applied. In other grown with limited irrigation and ob- effect of nitrogen (N) fertilizer inputs legume studies, Odland and Sheehan served a 12% to 30% increase in total and N cycling from cover crops on (1957) and Emmond and Ledingham yield and marketable tubers when po- yields. For example, Neeteson (1988) (1972) reported higher potato yields tato followed sorghum-sudangrass, reported higher potato yields at low following legumes than non-legumes with a greater increase in large tubers. N fertilizer rates following legumi- crops, but Murphy et al. (1967) found Cover crops that have been found to nous crops that have a lower carbon no yield benefits following legumes. provide soil disease suppression of ver- (C):N ratio and a higher N cycling The authors of the present study sug- ticillium wilt (Verticillium dahliae)of (N mineralization) potential, such as gest that these effects of legumes or potato include barley, corn (Zea mays), red clover (Trifolium pratense) and non-legume cover crops on tuber yield rape (Brassica rapa), oat, ryegrass, alfalfa (Medicago sativa). Conversely, responses could have been in part due sudangrass (Sorghum sudanense), and Neeteson (1988) reported lower yields to potential responses of potato culti- wheat, with sudangrass showing the were observed for potato following oat vars to the increased availability of N. greatest potato yield response for (Avena sativa), which is a cover crop For example, Essah and Delgado marketable-size tubers (Davis et al., with higher C:N ratio and lower poten- (2009) found that excessive applica- 1994). The studies by Davis et al. tial to mineralize N. Neeteson (1988) tion of N fertilizer reduced potato (1994) clearly show that there are found that at optimal N fertilizer rates, tuber yields and tuber quality and that several other parameters that can im- this response was dependent on the pact tuber yield and quality, such as 1Department of Horticulture and Landscape Archi- tecture, Colorado State University, San Luis Valley Research Center, Center, CO 81125 Units 2USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Fort Collins, To convert U.S. to SI, To convert SI to U.S., CO 80526 multiply by U.S. unit SI unit multiply by 3 Colorado State University (former), Monte Vista, 0.3048 ft m 3.2808 CO 81144 2.54 inch(es) cm 0.3937 4USDA NRCS, Center, CO 81125 25.4 inch(es) mm 0.0394 5Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]. 28.3495 oz g 0.0353 edu. 2.2417 ton/acre MgÁha–1 0.4461 • April 2012 22(2) 185 RESEARCH REPORTS disease suppression, in addition to the previous years of 2006 and 2007. Ap- means were compared using Fisher’s effects of nutrient availability and cy- plied compost was at the rate of protected least significant differ- cling of N from the cover crop. 4tons/acre. ence (LSD)testatthe0.05levelof In most studies conducted on Potato plots were harvested for probability. cover crops and potato performance, the 2006, 2007, and 2008 treatments. the effect of the cover crop on tuber Each randomized complete-block was Results and discussion size distribution and on tuber quality set up so that each plot had four rows TUBER YIELD AND TUBER SIZE is not well documented. There re- with between row spacing of 33 inches, DISTRIBUTION. For 2006, ‘Rio Grande mains a need for studies on the effect with tubers planted at in-row seed Russet’ tubers responded to cover crop of different cover crops on potato total spacingof11to12inches.Thepotato treatments compared with a wet fal- tuber yield and also on potato tuber crop was planted between 10 and 15 low system (P < 0.05, Table 1). In size distribution and tuber quality. The May and harvested between 15 and 20 2006, yield increased and tuber size goal of the present study was to ana- Sept. each year by harvesting the two increased when potato followed ‘Sor- lyze the effects of several cover crops middle rows of each plot using an ex- dan 79’ sorghum-sudangrass with all on potato tuber yield, potato tuber perimental plot potato digger at the of the aboveground biomass incorpo- size distribution, and tuber quality, as farmersfield,theweekbeforecom- rated, or even when the aboveground measured by tuber external and inter- mercial harvesting operations at the ‘Sordan 79’ biomass was harvested nal defects. field site started. For each plot, total for hay. Total tuber yields and yields tuber yield was measured and tubers of marketable-size (>4oz)tuberswere Materials and methods were sorted into various size distribu- increased with both ‘Sordan 79’ treat- The present study was conducted tion groups based on tuber weight ments. Larger tubers (>10 oz and 10– at the San Luis Valley in south-central (<4 oz, >4 oz, >10 oz, 4–10 oz, and 16 oz) were produced in both ‘Sordan Colorado (lat. 37°40#N, long. 106°9#W, 10–16 oz). Size distribution groups 79’ treatments compared with the wet 2310 m altitude). Field studies were are very important because different fallow treatment. conducted under commercial grower markets demand different size groups. In 2006, when the size of the tubers operations from 2006 to 2008, using Also, in the fresh market industry larger following both sorghum-sudangrass the traditional best management prac- tubers attract premium price. Addi- cultivars was compared with the size of tices recommended by Colorado State tionally, tuber external (growth cracks, the tubers following canola and mus- University (S.Y.C Essah, unpublished knobs, and misshapes) and internal tard, it was found that both sorghum- data). Cover crops and potato were (hollow heart and brown center) de- sudangrass cultivars contributed to grown under center-pivot irrigation fects were evaluated. Tuber internal higher total and marketable-size (>4 over a coarse-textured sandy soil with defects were evaluated by cutting into oz) tuber yields, as well as to the yield low soil organic matter (<1.5%). Each half all harvested tubers that were 8 oz of larger (>10 oz) tubers than the year, a randomizedcomplete-block de- or more in weight. canola and mustard cover crops. Al- sign with five replicated plots (35 ft Statistical analysis was conducted though canola, mustard, and wet fal- long by 12 ft wide) was established to using analysis of variance [ANOVA low total yield and marketable-size plant the cover crops. The cover crop (SAS version 9.2; SAS Institute, Cary, yields were not significantly different plots were established on a commercial NC)].