Open AccessSugarbeet response to interactions between fall‐seeded cover crop and fertilizer nitrogen application time
Author(s) -
Chatterjee Amitava
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
agrosystems, geosciences and environment
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2639-6696
DOI - 10.1002/agg2.20278
Subject(s) - secale , agronomy , cover crop , fertilizer , environmental science , biomass (ecology) , growing season , canopy , crop , normalized difference vegetation index , sugar beet , crop yield , leaf area index , biology , botany
Among many other ecosystem services, cover crops have potential to protect soil and nutrient loss from erosion. However, cover crop residues can alter nitrogen (N) dynamics and affect fertilizer N availability. Response of sugarbeet ( Beta vulgaris L.) yield and quality were studied for two fall‐seeded cover crops, winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) and cereal rye ( Secale cereale L.), and three fertilizer N treatments (fall and spring applications of 100% of recommended N, and 50% split in between fall and spring), in the Red River Valley of Minnesota. Cover crop species and fertilizer N application time significantly influenced sugarbeet canopy reflectance, soil inorganic N, and cover crop biomass production; however, they did not affect root yield and sugar concentration. Sugarbeet grown without a cover crop had higher normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and normalized difference red edge (NDRE) than sugarbeet grown after fall‐seeded rye. Fall N application had higher NDVI and NDRE than spring N application for most of the growing season. Cereal rye produced 15% higher biomass than winter wheat. Adoption of rye as a cover crop in sugarbeet might be possible without any adverse effect on sugarbeet production.