Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lcss20

Enhancing Environmental Performance with

Winter Cover Cropping after Potato Harvest in
Eastern Canada

Judith Nyiraneza, Bernie J. Zebarth, Sherry A.E. Fillmore, Mohammad

Khakbazan, Sheldon W.R. Hann & Josée Owen

To cite this article: Judith Nyiraneza, Bernie J. Zebarth, Sherry A.E. Fillmore, Mohammad
Khakbazan, Sheldon W.R. Hann & Josée Owen (2020) Enhancing Environmental Performance
with Winter Cover Cropping after Potato Harvest in Eastern Canada, Communications in Soil
Science and Plant Analysis, 51:11, 1499-1513, DOI: 10.1080/00103624.2020.1784920

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2020.1784920

Published online: 28 Jun 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 312

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=lcss20
COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS
2020, VOL. 51, NO. 11, 1499–1513
https://doi.org/10.1080/00103624.2020.1784920

Enhancing Environmental Performance with Winter Cover

Cropping after Potato Harvest in Eastern Canada
Judith Nyiranezaa, Bernie J. Zebarthb, Sherry A.E. Fillmorec, Mohammad Khakbazand,
Sheldon W.R. Hannb, and Josée Owenb
a
Charlottetown Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Charlottetown, Canada;
b
Fredericton Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Fredericton, Canada; cKentville
Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Kentville, Canada; dBrandon Research and
Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Brandon, Canada

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

In humid climates, the risk of nitrate leaching and topsoil loss due to erosion Received 15 January 2020
is high on bare soil in the fall after potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) harvest and Accepted 14 May 2020
in the spring with snowmelt. This 2-year study (2016–2017) compared three KEYWORDS
winter cover crops. Two of these are used as cash crops (winter rye [Secale Splash detachment; splash
cereale L.], winter wheat [Triticum aestivum L.]), and one is a winter-killed pan; winter cereal; winter
cover crop (spring barley, Hordeum vulgare L.). They were all seeded on two rye; winter wheat
dates after potato harvest (end of September or first week of October) in
Prince Edward Island, Canada. The measured parameters included soil nitrate
measured at different times in fall and in the following spring and summer,
splash detachment, C and N contents in splashed sediments, cereal straw dry
matter yield, and cereal grain yield. In both years, all winter cover crops
decreased splash detachment compared with the no winter cover control,
with winter rye having the greatest reduction. A similar trend was observed
for C and N contents in splashed sediments. There was a trend toward lower
soil nitrate following winter cover crops in comparison with bare soil, but the
trend was not consistent across trials and sampling dates. Winter wheat grain
yield ranged from 4.5 to 7.6 Mg ha−1, while that associated with winter rye
ranged from 3.2 to 5.1 Mg ha−1. Therefore, winter cereal seeded after potato
harvest can constitute a good source of revenue while mitigating the risk of
soil erosion and reducing nitrate leaching in some cases.

Introduction
Soil degradation, loss of topsoil due to erosion, and leaching of nutrients are encountered under
intensive agriculture, which is characterized by frequent soil tillage, high input requirements, low-
residue cropping systems, and light-textured soils. This is a particular issue in Prince Edward Island
(PEI), Canada, where over 40% of the total land area is cultivated. The province was ranked first in
Canada in 2016 for total area (83,326 acres) under potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) production
(Statistics Canada 2017). The combination of intensive potato production, high N inputs, undulating
topography, and sandy soils in PEI increases the risk of soil erosion and nutrient leaching into the
environment (Zebarth et al. 2015).
Building soil organic matter (SOM) is challenging under potato production systems because of
intensive soil cultivation and low residue returns, unless a regular organic amendment is supplied
(Stark and Porter 2005). A georeferenced study carried out from 1998 to 2015 in PEI reported

CONTACT Judith Nyiraneza Judith.nyiraneza@canada.ca Charlottetown Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and
Agri-Food Canada, Charlottetown, PE C1A 4N6, Canada
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
© 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
1500 J. NYIRANEZA ET AL.

a declining acreage of land showing SOM levels above 3%, with a predominance of land with SOM
between 2% and 3% and an increasing trend toward land acreage with SOM less than 2% (Nyiraneza
et al. 2017). There is a greater risk of loss of topsoil with water and tillage erosion during periods with
high precipitation when the soil is left bare. Heavy machine traffic during potato harvest followed by
prolonged rainy periods during fall, frequent snowmelts, and several freeze-thaw cycles during winter
time conduce to saturated to near-saturated soil conditions, which increase the risk of soil erosion.
From an 80-site-year study conducted in PEI, sediment depositions over winter averaged 13.3 t ha−1
under fields coming out of potato in comparison to 1.6 t ha−1 and 0.4 t ha−1 for fields coming out of
grain and forage crops, respectively (Edwards et al. 1998). Increasing ground surface cover in periods
that are usually left fallow (e.g., after potato harvest) can be an important management practice to
reduce wind and soil erosion by holding the soil in place (Ketterings et al. 2015).
Groundwater nitrate contamination is an important environmental issue in PEI (Commission on
Nitrates in Groundwater 2008; Zebarth et al. 2015). The potential for nitrate leaching is generally
higher following potato in comparison with potato rotation crops, which commonly consist of barley
(Hordeum vulgare L.) and red clover (Trifolium pratense L.) (Jiang, Zebarth, and Love 2011), and
nitrate leaching losses of up to 171 kg N ha−1 were reported under potato production depending on the
preceding crop (Jiang et al. 2012). Much of the nitrate leaching occurs during the fall and spring when
water inputs from rainfall and snowmelt are high and evapotranspiration is minimal (Jiang et al.
2012). Nitrate concentrations above the drinking water guideline were found in 15% to 20% of wells
from intensively potato-cropped areas in PEI (Savard et al. 2007; Zebarth et al. 2015). Over 15 estuaries
have shown eutrophication with reoccurring anoxic events due to high nitrate loads from inland to
estuarine environments (Bugden et al. 2014). Increased attention is being paid to management
strategies that minimize soil losses and nitrate leaching after potato harvest.
Cover crops are associated with multiple benefits, including increased soil organic C (Blanco-
Canqui et al. 2015; Dabney, Delgado, and Reeves 2001), improved nutrient cycling, and improved soil
health indicators, including soil aggregate stability, water-holding capacity, and soil microbial biomass
(Hartwig and Ammon 2002; Tonitto, David, and Drinkwater 2006). In addition, cover crops reduce
soil and wind erosion (Blanco-Canqui et al. 2015; Eshel et al. 2015) and the potential for N and P losses
(Gabriel et al. 2016; Griffin and Honeycutt 2009; Thorup-Kristensen, Magid, and Stoumann Jensen
2003; Vos and van der Putten 2004). Several studies have explored the costs and benefits of introdu­
cing cover crops into cropping systems (Roth et al. 2018; Snapp et al. 2005), as well as farmer
perceptions and challenges involved in the incorporation of cover crops (Roesch-McNally et al.
2017; Snapp et al. 2005). Cover crop selection can vary widely depending on farmer needs, current
agricultural management systems, and cropping systems, and there is a need for region-specific
information on the net benefits of cover crop use.
Winter cover crops or “catch crops” are normally planted after the main cash crops, as cover crops
are able to scavenge residual soil mineral N and prevent its leaching (Thorup-Kristensen, Magid, and
Stoumann Jensen 2003). In continuous corn and corn–soybean rotations, aerial seeding of cover crops
into standing crops has been explored due to the late harvest dates of corn and soybean (Belfry and
Van Eerd 2016; Blanco-Canqui et al. 2017). It is unsure whether such a practice could be successful in
PEI following late-maturing potato harvest where the short (154 frost-free days; Carter, Angers, and
Kunelius 1994) growing season results in a cold and wet environment after harvest, where a suitable
cover crop after potato harvest needs to germinate quickly and be cold-tolerant (Zebarth et al. 2009).
Winter rye (Secale cereale L.) germinates quickly and has hardy cold tolerance and as a result is
one of the most popular candidates for fall seeding after cash crop harvest (Dabney, Delgado, and
Reeves 2001; Edwards and Burney 1987). Marketable cold-tolerant winter cereals such as winter rye
and winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) (Gaudin et al. 2015) can constitute a source of revenue if
left to reach maturity and could represent an interesting option of a second cash crop following
potato. Depending on the climate, other winter-killed cover crops that have been explored include
cereal crops such as spring barley (Gabriel et al. 2016), brassicas, oil radish (Raphanus sativus) (Vos
and van der Putten 2004), and legumes such as hairy vetch (Vicia villosa) (Villamil et al. 2006).
 COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS 1501

Winter-killed cereals such as barley can germinate quickly, producing high biomass in fall depend­
ing on the weather and potato harvest time and thus mitigating soil erosion and nitrate leaching in
fall, whereas benefits of cold-tolerant cereals can be extended over a longer time period providing
best soil spring protection for both erosion and leaching losses. Given that much of the nitrate
leaching occurs during the fall and spring, the ability of winter cover crops to mitigate the risk of
nitrate leaching needs to be assessed beyond the fall period, including over winter, in spring and in
the following summer.
The effectiveness of cover crops in reducing N leaching depends on crop selection (aboveground
and belowground root growth patterns), soil type, crop management (seeding date), and environ­
mental conditions such as wind and precipitation (Blanco-Canqui et al. 2015). In general, in compar­
ison with legumes, grass cover crops are more effective nutrient scavengers, as they generally have
deeper roots and will decompose more slowly over time owing to their high tissue C:N ratio (Blanco-
Canqui et al. 2015). Conversely, legume cover crops may increase the risk of leaching by increasing the
concentration of soil N overall and causing more rapid mineralization in comparison with grasses
(Plaza-Bonilla et al. 2016). Seeding cover crops provides an opportunity not only to “scavenge” for
residual soil N but also to potentially recycle N for subsequent crops as the cover crop residues
decompose (Gabriel et al. 2016).
The objective of this study was to assess the potential to mitigate soil erosion and nitrate leaching by
seeding winter cover crops (winter rye, winter wheat and winter-killed barley) in fall after potato
harvest. The parameters measured included nitrate dynamics at different sampling dates (in fall, over
winter and in following spring and summer) as an index of the risk of nitrate leaching, and splash
detachment in fall after seeding winter cover crops as an index of the risk of soil erosion. Winter wheat
and winter rye grain yields were quantified to assess the potential of using winter rye and winter wheat
as the main cash crop after potato harvest.

Materials and methods

Site description and experimental design
The study was conducted in small plots (Experiment 1) and in commercial fields (Experiment 2). Both
experiments were established in PEI, Canada, with Experiment 1 conducted at Agriculture and Agri-
Food Canada’s Harrington Research Farm in Harrington PEI in both 2016 (46°20ʹ56.06ʺ N; 63°
09ʹ35.38ʺ W) and 2017 (46°20ʹ58.45ʺ N; 63°09ʹ34.25ʺ W). Experiment 2 included field-scale trials in
two nearby commercial fields in 2016, hereafter referred to as field winter wheat (coordinates omitted
to protect the privacy of the landowner) and field winter rye (coordinates omitted to protect the
privacy of the landowner). Under Experiment 1, the design was a randomized complete block design
with four winter cover crop treatments (spring barley, winter rye, and winter wheat plus a no cover
crop control) and two seeding dates (early and late) replicated four times. Trials were established in the
fall of 2016 and 2017 on fields that had been cropped to potato (cv. Russet Burbank). Each plot was 4 m
by 6 m, and the plots were 2 m apart.
In Experiment 2 in commercial fields, two fields of at least 2 ha each were selected, one seeded with
field winter rye and the second seeded with winter wheat. In each field, a strip at least 6 m wide was left
without winter cereal and was used as a control. Bare strips (unseeded control) and strips under winter
cover crops were then subdivided in four transects and were delineated with flags and treated as
replicates. Each transect had four sampling locations.
Soils for both experiments are classified in the Canadian soil science classification system as Orthic
Humo-Ferric Podzols, which corresponds to the Haplorthods great group in US taxonomy. Soil
properties for both experiments are reported in Table 1. In all cases, sand content was above
500 g kg−1, clay content was below 100 g kg−1, and SOM ranged from 3.1% to 3.5%. The soil pH
(1:1 water) ranged from 4.8 to 6.3, and the cation exchange capacity (CEC) ranged from 7 to 10 meq
100 g−1, with total base saturation varying from 53% to 81%. Phosphorus, K, Mg, and Ca extracted
1502 J. NYIRANEZA ET AL.

Table 1. Soil characteristics in Experiments 1 and 2.

Parameters Experiment 1 (Harrington Research Farm)* Experiment 2 (Commercial fields)†
2016 2016
2016 2017 Under field with winter rye Under field with winter wheat
Soil pH 6.3 6.2 4.8 5.8
SOM (%) 3.5 3.4 3.1 3.3
Sand content (g kg−1) 510 520 630 600
Clay content (g kg−1) 70 70 50 60
Silt content (g kg−1) 420 410 320 340
P (mg P2O5 kg−1) 206 221 625 205
K (mg K2O kg−1) 96 112 484 274
Mg (mg kg−1) 165 135 104 96
Ca (mg kg−1) 807 845 709 808
CEC (meq 100 g−1) 7 10 10 7
Base saturation (%) 81.2 53.5 52.6 80.7
*Samples taken 1 y before seeding of winter cover treatments.
†Samples taken just before seeding of winter cover treatments.

with Mehlich-3 extractant (Mehlich 1984) ranged from 206 to 625 mg P2O5 kg−1, 96 to 484 mg K2
O kg−1, 96 to 165 mg kg−1, and 709 to 845 mg Ca kg−1, respectively.

Winter cover cropping seeding and emergence count

In Experiment 1, after potato harvest, the plots underwent secondary tillage (two passes) before the
spring barley, winter wheat, and winter rye were drilled in with a Great Plains drill seeder at rates of
101, 150, and 150 kg ha−1, respectively. Winter cover crops were seeded on two dates, one at the end of
September and one in the first week of October. Early seeding was performed on September 27, 2016,
and September 29, 2017, whereas late seeding was performed on October 4, 2016, and October 5, 2017.
Cover crop emergence count was performed by counting the number of plants in an area of 30 cm2 in
two randomly seleted areas per experimental unit and then calculating and reporting the plant density
for each plot for 1 m2.
In Experiment 2 in commercial fields, after potato (cv. Prospect) harvest, two separate commercial
fields were seeded on October 4, the first (field winter wheat) with winter wheat drilled in at 168 to
179 kg ha−1 and the second (field winter rye) with winter rye broadcast at 213 kg ha−1. Emergence
count was performed 20 days after seeding as specified above.
In Experiments 1 and 2, no fertilizer was applied before seeding of winter cover crops. However,
because the intention was to harvest winter rye and winter wheat, top-dressed N fertilizer was applied
in the following spring to the winter rye and winter wheat crops by broadcasting 100 kg N ha−1. This
supplemental N fertilizer would not be needed if the growers plan to kill winter cereals in spring and
seed a more profitable cash crop.

Soil sampling and soil nitrate analyses in both experiments

In Experiment 1 in small plots in both years, soil samples were taken at two depths (0–15 and
15–30 cm) on five dates: in the fall on September 16, October 26 and November 25 (start of winter),
and in the following year on April 25 (prior to fertilizer application) and September 13 (after
harvesting winter cereals). Similarly, under Experiment 2 in commercial fields, samples were taken
on October 6 and November 7 in 2016, and in the following year on May 8 and after harvesting winter
cereals on September 14, 2017. For both experiments, one composite sample was collected for each soil
depth from each plot/transect consisting of four or five soil cores collected using a Dutch auger with
a random sampling strategy. Nitrate was extracted using 1 mol L−1 KCl (1:10 soil:extractant ratio)
(Maynard, Kalra, and Crumbaugh 2007).
 COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS 1503

Nitrate released over the fall and winter was captured in both experiments using anion exchange
membranes (AEMs) following the method described by Ziadi et al. (1999). In Experiment 1, the AEMs
were buried from October 25, 2016, to April 25, 2017, and from November 1, 2017, to April 24, 2018.
In Experiment 2, they were inserted from October 6, 2016, to May 9, 2017. The AEMs were inserted at
a depth of 15 cm using a trowel. Once retrieved, the AEMs were washed to remove all soil particles and
were extracted for nitrate by means of 2 h of shaking in 1 mol L−1 KCl.
Nitrate extracted from the soil or from the AEMs was analyzed using a Lachat QuikChem 8500
(Lachat Instruments, Loveland, CO). The soil nitrate fluxes measured by the AEMs were reported in
micrograms per square centimeter per day (µg cm−2 d−1) by dividing the NO3-N concentrations by the
strip surface area and by the burial time expressed in days.

Splash detachment measurements and marketable winter cover crop harvest in Experiment 1
Splash pans were inserted into each plot immediately after the early seeding of winter cover crops so
that soil particles detached by raindrops could be quantified under all treatments (control, spring
barley, winter rye, and winter wheat) in 2016 and 2017. The splash pans were made by Belmont Metal
Works (Charlottetown, PE, Canada) on the basis of the description provided by Parlak and Özaslan
Parlak (2010). Made of stainless steel, the splash pans consisted of a tray with an upslope and
a downslope compartment (Figure 1). Soil particles detached by raindrops were collected in
a circular catching tray with a 10-cm-high boundary wall. The splash pans have an inner hollow

Figure 1. Splash pan illustration (Parlak and Özaslan Parlak 2010).

1504 J. NYIRANEZA ET AL.

cylinder 10 cm in diameter, which was pushed into the ground until flush with the soil surface. The
splash pans were left in the ground and then collected 61 d after seeding in 2016 and 47 d after seeding
in 2017. After they were gently removed from the field, the splash pans were brought to the laboratory,
where a squeeze bottle with distilled water was used to thoroughly rinse the splash pans and recover all
soil particles, which were subsequently dried in the oven at 60°C until constant mass.
The amount of soil particles detached by splash erosion was calculated as D = M/A, where D is the
mass of soil per unit surface area (g m−2), M is the mass of soil splashed from the inner cylinder (g),
and A is the area of a circle (m2). The collected soils were analyzed for total N and C contents using the
dry combustion method with an Elementar analyzer (Vario Max; Elementar Analyzer system GmbH,
Hanau, Germany).
Winter rye and winter wheat were harvested from a 9-m2 (1.5 m by 6 m) area of each plot using
a plot combine. Straw in the harvested area was weighed, and a subsample of approximately 500 g was
collected and dried at 55°C in the oven until constant mass so that dry matter could be calculated.
Under Experiment 2, the whole field was harvested before subsamples could be taken to allow an
average calculation, but the overall yield was recorded.

Statistical analysis
All data were tested for normality using the UNIVARIATE procedure of the SAS software program,
version 9.3 (SAS Institute 2010). The MIXED procedure of SAS was used to perform statistical
analyses by treating blocks or replicates as random effects and treatments and seeding time as fixed
effects for the small plot in Experiment 1, whereas for the commercial field in Experiment 2, replicates
were treated as random effects and the treatments as fixed effects. Multiple comparisons among
treatment means were performed using the DIFF option in SAS at the 0.05 probability level.

Results
Weather
The effectiveness of winter cereals in mitigating soil erosion and scavenging residual soil nitrate after
potato harvest is likely to be affected by the weather, more so in the fall than in the spring, since the fall
is when the establishment and growth of winter cereals are expected to be affected the most. Both years
were generally comparable in terms of mean temperature and highest monthly temperature, although
2017 tended to be associated with lower nominal values of lowest monthly temperature (Table 2).
Compared to the long-term climate normals, the mean monthly and highest monthly temperature
values were mostly higher in 2016 and 2017, except for the mean temperature in December 2016 and

Table 2. Air temperature, precipitation, and snow accumulation and climate normals (Normals) in fall of 2016 and 2017.
Parameters September October November December
2016 2017 Normals 2016 2017 Normals 2016 2017 Normals 2016 2017 Normals
Mean temperature (°C) 15.3 15.6 14.1 9.9 11.6 8.3 4.7 3.1 2.9 −3.4 −4.5 −3.3
Highest monthly temperature 27.2 28.5 18.6 22.2 22.9 12.3 15.1 19.0 6.3 10.5 12.4 0.5
(°C)
Lowest monthly temperature 5.4 1.9 9.6 −0.8 −1.8 4.4 −1.5 −7.1 −0.5 −18.9 −20.2 −7.0
(°C)
Total precipitation (mm) 68.0 56.5 95.9 136.2 34.8 112.2 123.7 120.5 112.5 92.9 78.0 118.1
Snow accumulation (cm) 0 0 0 0 0 1.7 50.4 6.3 19.2 75.2 22.7 65.6
Data at Harrington weather station (46°20ʹ37.020″ N; 63°10ʹ11.050″ W) except snow accumulation, which was recorded at the
Charlottetown airport. Climate normals from the Charlottetown airport weather station (46°17ʹ19.020″; 63°07ʹ43.070″ W).
Harrington weather station: http://climate.weather.gc.ca/prods_servs/cdn_climate_summary_e.html
Charlottetown airport weather station (climate normals):
http://climate.weather.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_1981_2010_e.html?searchType=stnProv&lstProvince=
PE&txtCentralLatMin=0&txtCentralLatSec=0&txtCentralLongMin=0&txtCentralLongSec=0&stnID=6526&dispBack=0
 COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS 1505

2017, which was lower than the climate normals. Conversely, the lowest monthly temperature values
were lower than the climate normals.
Total precipitation was higher in the fall of 2016 than in the fall of 2017, particularly in October
(Table 2). Total precipitation was lower than the climate normals in September 2016 and 2017. In
October 2016, total precipitation was 21% higher than the climate normals, whereas it was three-folds
lower than climate normals in October 2017. Total precipitation was higher than climate normals in
November 2016 and 2017, whereas it was lower in December 2016 and 2017. Monthly snow
accumulation was lower than climate normals in October 2016, October 2017, November 2017, and
December 2017, while it was higher in November 2016 and December 2016.

Plant emergence counts in both experiments

In Experiment 1 in 2016, there was a significant effect of winter cover treatment on plant emergence,
but the seeding date effect was not significant. Averaged across seeding dates, winter wheat had
a higher plant density than winter rye and spring barley at 24 d after early seeding (Figure 2a). In 2017,
there was a significant seeding date by crop species interaction on plant density measured 26 d after the
early seeding, where plant density for the early seeding date was greater for winter rye than winter
wheat or barley (Figure 2b), whereas plant density did not vary among winter cover crops for the late
seeding date (Figure 2c). The increased plant density for winter cereals may be due in part to the
greater seeding rate for winter cereals (150 kg ha−1) than for barley (101 kg ha−1).
In Experiment 2 in fall 2016, emergence count measured 20 days after seeding was of 115 counts m2
and 128 counts m2 for winter wheat and winter rye, respectively. The emergence count in Experiment
2 was in the high range of that under Experiment 1 due to higher seeding rate.

180 180
Emergence count (plant m2)
Emergence count (plant m2)

160 a) 160 b)
a a
140 140
b
120 120
b
100
b 100 b

80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0

Spring barley Winter rye Winter wheat Spring barley Winter rye Winter wheat

180
Emergence count (plant m-2)

160 c)
a
140
a
120
a
100

80

60

40

20

Spring barley Winter rye Winter wheat

Figure 2. Plant emergence count for three crop species and two sampling dates in Experiment 1 in fall 2016 ((a), averaged across
seeding dates because the interaction between treatments and seeding date was not significant) and 2017 ((b), for early seeding
date, (c), for late seeding date. Interaction between treatments and seeding date was significant). The emergence count was
performed 24 d after early seeding date in 2016 and 26 d after early seeding date in 2017. Values with different letters are statistically
significant at the 0.05 probability level. Vertical bars represent the standard error of the mean.
1506 J. NYIRANEZA ET AL.

Winter cover crops on splash detachment in Experiment 1

The amount of soil collected in the splash pan represents the amount of soil susceptible to be
transported by erosion depending on the slope. In Experiment 1 in 2016, spring barley and winter
rye had significantly lower splash detachment than the control (Figure 3a). In comparison, splash
detachment for winter wheat was numerically, but not significantly, 14% lower than the control. In
2017, all winter cover crops reduced splash detachment compared with the control, with the greatest
reduction (59%) measured for winter rye (Figure 3b).

10 10

Splashed soil particles (kg m-2)

Splashed soil particles (kg m-2)

a) b)
a
8 ab 8

b
6 b 6
a
bc
4 4
b

2 2 c

0 0
Control SB WR WW Control SB WR WW

120 120
c) d)
100 a a 100
C contents (g m-2)

C contents (g m-2)

80 a 80
a
a
60 60 b
c b

40 40

20 20

0 0
Control SB WR WW Control SB WR WW

10 10
a e) f)
8 8
N contets (g m-2)

N contents (g m-2)

a a a
6 6 a
b
4 b
4
c
2 2

0 0
Control SB WR WW Control SB WR WW

Figure 3. Splash detachment of early-seeded winter cover treatments in Experiment 1 in fall of 2016 and 2017. (a, b) mass of soil in
2016 and 2017, respectively; (c, d) mass of soil C in 2016 and 2017, respectively; and (e, f) mass of soil N in 2016 and 2017,
respectively. Splash detachment was measured 61 d and 47 d after seeding in 2016 and 2017, respectively. SB, spring barley; WR,
winter rye; WW, winter wheat. Values with different letters are statistically significant at the 0.05 probability level. Vertical bars
represent the standard error of the mean.
 COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS 1507

Mass of soil C collected in the splash pans did not differ significantly among cover crop treatments
in 2016 (Figure 3c). In contrast, mass of soil C was greatest in the control treatment, intermediate in
the spring barley and winter wheat treatments, and lowest in the winter rye treatment in 2017 (Figure
3d). Mass of soil N collected in splash pans followed the same pattern as mass of soil C in both years
(Figure 3e,f).

Nitrate dynamics in Experiment 1

Overall, comparable values among treatments were observed, with few exceptions where lower soil
nitrate was observed with winter cover crops than with the control. Winter rye and winter wheat were
associated with lower values than the control for samples taken on October 26, 2016, at 15–30 cm
depth (Table 3), while winter rye was associated with lower nitrate concentrations for samples taken
on May 9, 2017, for both depths (Table 4). There was a significant seeding date by winter cover
interaction on soil nitrate concentration measured on September 16 and November 25, 2016 (Table 3).
However, there were no consistent trends when the treatments were compared within a sampling date.
For exampleon September 16, winter rye and winter wheat were associated with higher nominal values
of soil nitrate concentration for the early seeding date, whereas the control and the winter rye were

Table 3. Soil nitrate-N concentrations on five sampling dates for two soil depths, and nitrate desorbed from anion exchange
membranes over the winter, as influenced by four winter cover treatments and two seeding dates under Experiment 1 established in
fall of 2016.
Source of September 16, October 26, November 25, September 13,
variation 2016 2016 2016 April 25, 2017 2017 AEMs over winter+
Sampling depth (cm)
0 to 15 to 0 to 15 to 0 to 15 to 0 to 15 to 0 to 15 to
15 30 15 30 15 30 15 30 15 30
(mg NO3-N kg−1) (µg NO3-N cm−2 d−1)
Seeding time
Early 44.3a 32.7a 15.7a 16.5a 7.5b 6.4a 4.4a 3.9a 4.5a 4.6a 0.48a
Late 41.0a 28.4a 16.4a 15.6a 11.0a 7.3a 3.8a 3.4a 6.2a 5.7a 0.41a
Treatments
Control 47.4a 32.4a 16.9a 20.2a 7.7a 5.9a 5.10a 4.2a 4.10a 5.2a 0.38a
Spring barley 40.2a 29.8a 15.4a 16.7ab 8.8a 6.9a 3.11a 2.9a 4.0a 4.1a 0.43a
Winter rye 50.6a 34.1a 15.2a 13.5b 8.1a 6.9a 3.9a 3.6a 6.2a 6.2a 0.44a
Winter wheat 32.5a 25.9a 16.4a 13.8b 12.4a 7.9a 4.3a 4.0a 7.1a 5.1a 0.53a
Values within a column followed by different letters are statistically significant at the 0.05 probability level.
+ From October 25, 2016, to April 25, 2017.

Table 4. Soil nitrate-N concentrations on five sampling dates for two soil depths, and nitrate desorbed from anion exchange
membranes left over the winter under Experiment 1 established in fall 2017.
Source of AEMs+
variation Sept. 25, 2017 Oct. 24, 2017 Nov. 22, 2017 May 9, 2018 Aug. 22, 2018 over winter
Sampling depth (cm)
0 to 15 15 to 30 0 to 15 15 to 30 0 to 15 15 to 30 0 to 15 15 to 30 0 to 15 15 to 30
(mg NO3-N kg−1) (µg NO3-N
cm−2 d−1)
Seeding time
Early 28.6a 25.10a 25.6a 24.4a 6.4a 11.6a 2.4a 3.6a 1.8a 2.2a 0.47a
Late 22.5a 19.1a 26.8a 27.1a 5.8a 139a 2.2a 3.2a 2.0a 2.0a 0.52a
Treatment
Control 23.4a 21.1a 27.1a 25.2ab 5.2a 9.5a 2.9a 4.4a 1.5b 1.9bc 0.52a
Spring barley 25.3a 20.8a 24.4a 22.7b 6.1a 13.8a 3.3a 5.0a 1.7b 1.7 c 0.58a
Winter rye 27.7a 22.8a 22.4a 22.8b 4.8a 11.4a 0.8 c 1.5 c 2.3a 2.4ab 0.37a
Winter wheat 25.6a 23.7a 30.9a 32.1a 8.4a 16.4a 2.1b 2.6b 2.20a 2.5a 0.40a
Values within a column followed by different letters are statistically significant at the 0.05 probability level.
+ From November 1, 2017, to April 24, 2018.
1508 J. NYIRANEZA ET AL.

associated with higher nominal values for the late seeding date (data not reported). Also, on
November 25, spring barley was associated with higher nominal values of soil nitrate concentration
for the early seeding date, whereas winter wheat was associated with higher nominal values for the late
seeding date (data not reported). Similarly, although soil nitrate concentration varied significantly
among winter cover treatments for some dates and depths in the fall, spring and summer of both years,
differences among treatments were generally small in magnitude and of limited biological significance
(Tables 3, 4). Soil nitrate concentration was significantly affected by seeding date only for
November 25, 2016, when soil nitrate concentration was higher for the late-seeded than the early-
seeded treatments.
There was no significant effect of seeding time or winter cover treatment on nitrate desorbed from
anion exchange membranes on any sampling dates in either year (Tables 3, 4). Though not statistically
significant, lower nominal values of nitrate desorbed from the AEMs were observed with winter rye
and winter wheat compared to the control and to spring barley for winter cover crops seeded in fall
2017 (Table 4).

Nitrate dynamics in Experiment 2

In October 2016, both winter rye and winter wheat significantly reduced soil nitrate concentration
compared with the control (Table 5). In November 2016, soil nitrate was 33% and 56% lower under
winter rye compared to the control at the 0–15-cm and 15–30-cm depths, respectively. Soil nitrate was
generally lower in the following spring of 2017 for the winter cover crop species than for the control,
with the exception of the 0–15-cm depth for winter wheat with values comparable to those of the
control treatment. Soil nitrate concentration was higher for both winter cereal species in comparison
with the control 1 year after seeding cover crops (in September 2017) because of the top-dressed
N fertilizer applied to the winter cereal during the spring of that year.
Nitrate desorbed from the over-winter AEMs was significantly lower with both winter cereal crops
than for the control (Table 5). Desorbed nitrate was reduced by 49% and 25% by winter wheat and
winter rye, respectively.

Winter cereal straw dry matter, grain yield, and thousand grain weight in Experiment 1
There was no effect of seeding date on winter cereal straw dry matter, grain yield, or thousand grain
weight (TGW) in Experiment 1 (Table 6). The exception was in 2016, when late seeding resulted in
higher winter wheat grain yield compared to early seeding. Winter rye ranged from 4.5 to 5.1 Mg
ha−1, and winter wheat ranged from 6.1 to 7.6 Mg ha−1, depending on the year and seeding time
(Table 6).

Table 5. Soil nitrate-N concentrations on four dates, and nitrate desorbed from anion exchange membranes over the winter, as
affected by winter cereal crops in commercial fields under Experiment 2 established in fall 2016.
Soil nitrate-N concentration (mg kg−1) AEM over winter+
Oct. 6, 2016 Nov. 7, 2016 May 8, 2017 Sept. 14, 2017
Sampling depth (cm)
0 to 15 15 to 30 0 to 15 15 to 30 0 to 15 15 to 30 0 to 15 15 to 30 (µg NO3-N cm−2 d−1)
Field with winter rye
Control 40.2a 33.4a 13.7a 14.7a 29.2a 20.3a 5.15b 4.4a 0.39a
Winter rye 29.4b 23.6b 10.3a 9.4b 19.8b 11.6b 12.03a 7.8b 0.20b
Field with winter wheat
Control 46.6a 39.6a 11.6a 12.5a 35.7a 31.6a 5.3a 5.8a 0.87a
Winter Wheat 25.9b 24.6b 15.6a 15a 30.8a 24.2b 8.4a 8.1a 0.65b
Note: Values within a column for the same field site with different letters are statistically significant at the 0.05 probability level.
+ From October 6, 2016, to May 9, 2017.
 COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS 1509

Table 6. Effect of seeding time on winter rye and winter wheat grain yield, straw dry matter, and thousand grain weight (TGW) in
2016 and 2017 in Experiment 1.
Sources of variation Winter rye Winter wheat
Grain yield Straw TGW Grain Straw TGW
(Mg ha−1) (g) (Mg ha−1) (g)
2016
Seeding time
Early 4.8a 3.2a 38.6a 6.3b 2.3a 39.8a
Late 4.9a 3.3a 38.7a 7.6a 2.8a 42.3a
2017
Seeding time
Early 5.1a 6.9a 30.6a 6.1a 4.1a 43.02a
Late 4.5a 5.9a 30.7a 6.1a 3.4a 42.3a
Values within a column followed by same letters are not statistically significant at the 0.05 probability level.

Grain yield in Experiment 2

The overall yields recorded by the grower were of 4.5 Mg ha−1 and 3.2 Mg ha−1 for winter wheat and
winter rye, respectively.

Discussion
As expected, winter rye and winter wheat grain yields at field scale (4.5 Mg ha−1 for the winter wheat
and 3.2 Mg ha−1 for the winter rye) were in a lower range than those from plot scale (6.1 to 7.6 Mg ha−1
for winter wheat and from 4.5 to 5.1 Mg ha−1 for winter rye). Yield gaps between plot and field scale
have been reported due to more spatial variability in plant growth and crop yield at field scale (Florin,
McBratney, and Whelan 2009; Kravchenko et al. 2005) and the use of a conversion factor to convert
yield from a micro-plot to a hectare basis. Compared to field scale, variability is minimized at plot scale
with blocking and well-planned plot layouts (Jaynes et al. 2003; Kravchenko et al. 2006). Winter rye
grain was somewhat lower than yields from trials conducted in Harrington and in Truro, Nova Scotia,
using the rye variety Danko, for which the yield ranged from 6.5 to 7.8 t ha−1 (Dan MacEachern, cereal
and oil seed varieties specialist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, personal communication,
September 5, 2018). Winter wheat yield in this study was higher than the local yield, which averages
3.2 to 5.90 t ha−1, depending on the wheat variety and the site, according to trials conducted from 2012
to 2014 in New Brunswick (Government of New Brunswick 2015). The PEI Department of Agriculture
and Land conducted performance trials for winter wheat cultivars from 2014 to 2017 and reported an
average yield (n = 10 varieties) of 5.1 t ha−1 in 2017 (Government of Prince Edward Island 2018).
Differences in yield may be attributed to differences in seeding rate and method, seeded variety, and
total available soil N. Winter cereals were seeded after potato harvest, which leaves behind high
residual mineral N. In addition, a supplement of 100 kg N ha−1 was top-dressed in spring, which is
a common practice in PEI. Drill seeding following two passes of secondary tillage in this study may
have enhanced cover crop establishment in comparison with broadcasting (Edwards and Hergert
1990).
Winter wheat straw dry matter yield in this study (2.3 to 4.1 t ha−1) was comparable to the average
(n = 7) value of 4.0 t ha−1 reported by the PEI Department of Agriculture and Fisheries in 2018
(Government of Prince Edward Island 2018). The TGW values in this study (39.8 to 43.0 g) were
toward the high end of the range of 33 to 39 g reported in the same PEI study (Government of Prince
Edward Island 2018).
Seeding at the end of September or by the first week of October did not affect crop performance,
except in 2017, when late winter wheat seeding resulted in higher yields than early seeding did. It is not
very clear why late seeding would result in higher winter wheat yield than early seeding, but it may be
attributed to a difference in weather conditions, especially temperature, following seeding time. The
1510 J. NYIRANEZA ET AL.

cold acclimation and the winter survival of winter cereals is improved with a higher temperature after
seeding, which allows a quick establishment and a healthy, strong plant. Daily mean temperature
averaged 10.6°C for the 7 days following early seeding, compared with 12.4°C for the 7 days following
late seeding. Even though we did not observe important winter cover crop growth during the fall,
maintaining ground cover holds the soil particles in place, minimizing their detachment by raindrop
impacts.
In this study, winter cover crops significantly reduced splash detachment compared to the control
treatment. In general, the decrease in soil erosion is proportional to the increase in biomass of the
winter cover crop from cover crops (Boyd, Gordon, and Martin 2002; Eshel et al. 2015; Kariaga 2004).
A recent model simulation using APSIM (Agricultural Production Systems Simulator) suggested that
cover crops could reduce the risk of erosion by 11% to 29% compared to no cover crop control (Basche
et al. 2016). In the short term, aboveground cover crops increase biomass, preventing erosion, while
belowground roots can add biomass, reduce soil compaction, and improve water infiltration (Blanco-
Canqui et al. 2015; Carter et al. 2003).
In a laboratory rainfall simulator study (50 mm h−1 for 30 min) with loam, sandy loam, and fine
sandy loam soils, the incorporation of winter rye reduced sediment loss by between 70% and 80%
compared with bare fallow, owing to increased ground cover (Edwards and Burney 1987). Similar
results were reported in Çanakkale, Turkey, where splash detachment decreased by an average of five-
fold with vetch, ryegrass, or barley compared to a control with no cover crop over a mild winter (8°C)
between January and March (Parlak and Özaslan Parlak 2010).
In a previous study in PEI, significant sediment loss and runoff volume reduction was observed
more often when winter rye was planted at the earliest seeding date of September 15 at rates of
200 kg ha−1 in comparison with seeding on September 29 (Edwards and Burney 2007). In this study,
we demonstrated that winter cover crops planted by the first week of October can be beneficial in
reducing splash detachment. The feasibility of seeding winter cover crops after late potato varieties
needs to be assessed. Late-maturing potato varieties account for about 60% of the varieties planted and
are used for processing (French fries and potato chips). The remaining 40% are used for table stock
and seed. The early harvest starts in August, and the processing variety harvest runs from early
October until the first week of November, depending on the weather and seeding time (Ryan Barrett,
Research Coordinator, PEI Potato Board, personal communication, September 22, 2018). Therefore,
winter cover crops could be seeded by the first week of October on at least 50% of the land in PEI that
is cropped to potato every year, and this percentage could increase depending on the growing season.
Potato requires high N inputs, yet at the same time N use efficiency in potato production under humid
climatic conditions can be below 40% (Errebhi et al. 1998). Much of the N applied remains in the soil
after potato harvest, and an ideal winter cereal is expected to scavenge residual soil nitrate.
The role of winter cereals in reducing soil nitrate was not consistent among the trials. In
Experiment 1 in 2016 and 2017, soil nitrate levels were comparable among the treatments for several
sampling dates, with a few exceptions when soil nitrate was lower with winter cereals than with the
control. In the commercial fields in Experiment 2, there was a clear trend, with winter rye or winter
wheat being associated with lower soil nitrate than the control. Previous studies also reported lower
soil nitrate with winter cereal compared to a no-cover control treatment. Bundy and Andraski (2005)
reported that soil profile (0 to 90 cm) NO3-N in the fall was significantly lower under a winter rye cover
crop (19 kg ha−1) than under bare fallow (26 kg ha−1). In Denmark on a sandy loam soil (Typic
Agrudalf), residual soil nitrate following green pea or barley summer crops was approximately 30 and
15 kg N ha−1, respectively, when winter rye or ryegrass was planted, in comparison with 160 and 60 kg
N ha−1, respectively, under bare fallow (Thorup-Kristensen, Magid, and Stoumann Jensen 2003). In
the Netherlands, Vos and van der Putten (2004) found that winter rye following potato crops in
a sandy soil reduced nitrate-N leaching by approximately 58% between September after potato harvest
and March of the following year, averaged over three potato growing seasons. In a silty clay loam, rye
cover crops grown following corn in a continuous corn rotation reduced N leaching by 26% in
comparison with bare fallow without reducing corn yield, and positively improved C inputs in soil
 COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS 1511

(Martinez-Feria et al. 2016). In a 7-year study in Spain on a silty clay loam, barley and vetch winter
cover crops planted after corn resulted in reduced risk of NO3 leaching in comparison with bare fallow
(Gabriel et al. 2016). The inconsistency in reducing soil nitrate under winter cereals in our study was
likely due to the cold and wet climate of PEI, where crops seeded in October are not expected to
produce significant biomass before winter. The abovementioned studies in which a significant reduc­
tion in nitrate was observed were carried out in areas with milder winters, which allow for faster cover
crop establishment and a longer period of growth in the fall and thus reduced nitrate in the soil.

Practical implications and conclusion

A recent study by Roesch-McNally et al. (2017) reported that a given agricultural practice is adopted
quickly by growers if there are economic incentives in addition to agronomic considerations and
benefits for soil health. Soil is highly disturbed during the potato phase, and winter cereals could help
protect the soil by providing ground cover and could minimize soil loss through erosion in the fall and
winter. Conventional practice consists of leaving the soil bare over the winter and seeding barley
underseeded with red clover in the following spring. From our results, winter cereal could present an
interesting option of a second cash crop while providing soil fall and spring protection and thus
mitigating soil erosion risk. Potato growers are focusing on strategies to enhance potato yield by
building SOM to offset the lower net revenue associated with barley (Ryan Barrett, Research
Coordinator, PEI Potato Board, personal communication, September 22, 2018).
In summary, seeding winter cereals such as winter rye and winter wheat after the harvest of early
potato varieties could have economic and environmental benefits for growers. The environmental
benefits of winter cereals were associated more with enhancing ground cover than with scavenging
residual soil nitrate after potato harvest. A winter cereal seeded after potato harvest holds the soil
particles in place and thus reduces splash detachment. This practice could be done at the beginning of
October on approximately 50% of the land cultivated to potato in PEI. Experimentation with different
establishment windows later than the first week of October and with other hardy winter cereals is
needed.

Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for the technical assistance provided by Irene Power, Barbara Enman, Dorothy Gregory,
Danielle Murnaghan, Brian Murray, and the Harrington research farm crew. Authors acknowledge Oyster Cove Farm
for participating in this study. Funding was provided by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada.

References
Basche, A. D., S. V. Archontoulis, T. C. Kaspar, D. B. Jaynes, T. B. Parkin, and F. E. Miguez. 2016. Simulating long-term
impacts of cover crops and climate change on crop production and environmental outcomes in the Midwestern
United States. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 218:95–106. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2015.11.011.
Belfry, K. D., and L. L. Van Eerd. 2016. Establishment and impact of cover crops intersown into corn. Crop Science 56
(3):1245–56. doi:10.2135/cropsci2015.06.0351.
Blanco-Canqui, H., T. M. Shaver, J. L. Lindquist, C. A. Shapiro, R. W. Elmore, C. A. Francis, and G. W. Hergert. 2015.
Cover crops and ecosystem services: Insights from studies in temperate soils. Agronomy Journal 107 (6):2449–74.
doi:10.2134/agronj15.0086.
Blanco-Canqui, H., M. Sindelar, C. S. Wortmann, and G. Kreikemeier. 2017. Aerial interseeded cover crop and corn
residue harvest: Soil and crop impacts. Agronomy Journal 109 (4):1344–51. doi:10.2134/agronj2017.02.0098.
Boyd, N. S., R. Gordon, and R. C. Martin. 2002. Relationship between leaf area index and ground cover in potato under
different management conditions. Potato Research 45 (2–4):117–29. doi:10.1007/BF02736107.
Bugden, G., Y. Jiang, M. R. van den Heuvel, H. Vandermulen, K. T. B. MacQuarrie, C. J. Crane, and B. G. Raymond.
2014. Nitrogen loading criteria for estuaries in Prince Edward Island. Canadian Technical Report of Fisheries and
Aquatic Sciences 3066. https://www.princeedwardisland.ca/sites/default/files/publications/nitrogen_loading_cri
teria_for_estuaries_in_prince_edward_island.pdf.
1512 J. NYIRANEZA ET AL.

Bundy, L. G., and T. W. Andraski. 2005. Recovery of fertilizer nitrogen in crop residues and cover crops on an irrigated
sandy soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal 69 (3):640–48. doi:10.2136/sssaj2004.0216.
Carter, M. R., D. A. Angers, and H. T. Kunelius. 1994. Soil structural form and stability and organic matter under
cool-season perennial grasses. Soil Science Society of America Journal 58:1194–99. doi:10.2136/
sssaj1994.03615995005800040027x.
Carter, M. R., H. T. Kunelius, J. B. Sanderson, J. Kimpinski, H. W. Platt, and M. A. Bolinder. 2003. Productivity
parameters and soil health dynamics under long-term 2-year potato rotations in Atlantic Canada. Soil and Tillage
Research 72 (2):153–68. doi:10.1016/S0167-1987(03)00085-0.
Commission on Nitrates in Groundwater. 2008. The report of the Commission on Nitrates in Groundwater. Prince
Edward Island Government, Document Publishing Centre, Charlottetown.
Dabney, S. M., J. A. Delgado, and D. W. Reeves. 2001. Using winter cover crops to improve soil and water quality.
Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis 32 (7&8):1221–50. doi:10.1081/CSS-100104110.
Edwards, L. M., and J. R. Burney. 1987. Soil erosion losses under freeze/thaw and winter ground cover using a laboratory
rainfall simulator. Canadian Agricultural Engineering 29 (2):109–15.
Edwards, L. M., and J. R. Burney. 2007. Effect of cover crop seeding rate and date on cool period soil erosion control in
potato production in PEI, Canada. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 87 (4):851–54. doi:10.4141/CJPS06039.
Edwards, L. M., and G. B. Hergert. 1990. Establishing winter rye as cover crop after potatoes. Canadian Agricultural
Engineering 32:183–87.
Edwards, L. M., G. Richter, B. Bermsdorf, R. G. Schmidt, and J. Burney. 1998. Measurement of rill erosion by snowmelt
on potato fields under rotation in Prince Edward Island (Canada). Canadian Journal of Soil Science 78:449–58.
doi:10.4141/S97-053.
Errebhi, M., C. J. Rosen, S. C. Gupta, and D. E. Birong. 1998. Potato yield response and nitrate leaching as influenced by
nitrogen management. Agronomy Journal 90 (1):10–15. doi:10.2134/agronj1998.00021962009000010003x.
Eshel, G., R. Egozi, Y. Goldwasser, Y. Kashti, P. Fine, E. Hayut, H. Kazukro, B. Rubin, Z. Dar, O. Keisar, et al. 2015.
Benefits of growing potatoes under cover crops in a Mediterranean climate. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment
211:1–9. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2015.05.002.
Florin, M. J., A. B. McBratney, and B. M. Whelan. 2009. Quantification and comparison of wheat yield variation across
space and time. European Journal of Agronomy 30:212–19. doi:10.1016/j.eja.2008.10.003.
Gabriel, J. L., M. Alonso-Ayuso, I. García-González, C. Hontoria, and M. Quemada. 2016. Nitrogen use efficiency and
fertiliser fate in a long-term experiment with winter cover crops. European Journal of Agronomy 79:14–22.
doi:10.1016/j.eja.2016.04.015.
Gaudin, A. C. M., K. Janovicek, B. Deen, and D. C. Hooker. 2015. Wheat improves nitrogen use efficiency of maize and
soybean-based cropping systems. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 210:1–10. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2015.04.034.
Government of New Brunswick. 2015. 2015 cereal guide to cultivar and pesticide selection. New Brunswick Department
of Agriculture, Aquaculture and Fisheries. https://www2.gnb.ca/content/dam/gnb/Departments/10/pdf/Agriculture/
FieldCrops-GrandesCultures/cereal2015.pdf.
Government of Prince Edward Island. 2018. 2018 Maritime cereal cultivars performance trials 2014–2017. Prince
Edward Island Agriculture and Fisheries. https://www.princeedwardisland.ca/sites/default/files/publications/af_cer
ealguide.pdf.
Griffin, T. S., and C. W. Honeycutt. 2009. Effectiveness and efficacy of conservation options after potato harvest. Journal
of Environmental Quality 38 (4):1627–35. doi:10.2134/jeq2008.0272.
Hartwig, N. L., and H. U. Ammon. 2002. Cover crops and living mulches. Weed Science 50 (6):688–99. doi:10.1614/0043-
1745(2002)050[0688:AIACCA]2.0.CO;2.
Jaynes, D. B., T. C. Kaspar, T. S. Calvin, and D. E. James. 2003. Cluster analysis of spatiotemporal corn yield patterns in
an Iowa field. Agronomy Journal 95:574–86. doi:10.2134/agronj2003.5740.
Jiang, Y., B. Zebarth, and J. Love. 2011. Long-term simulations of nitrate leaching from potato production systems in
Prince Edward Island, Canada. Nutrient Cycling in Agroecosystems 91 (3):307–25. doi:10.1007/s10705-011-9463-z.
Jiang, Y., B. J. Zebarth, G. H. Somers, J. A. Macleod, and M. M. Savard. 2012. Nitrate leaching from potato production in
Eastern Canada. In Sustainable potato production: Global case studies, ed. Z. He, R. Larkin, and W. Honeycutt,
233–50. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Kariaga, B. M. 2004. Intercropping maize with cowpeas and beans for soil and water management in western Kenya.
Proceedings of ISCO 2004 – 13th International Soil Conservation Organisation Conference, Brisbane, Australia,
Australian Society of Soil Science Incorporated and International Erosion Control Association (Australasia),
Warragul and Picton, Australia, July 4–8.
Ketterings, Q. M., S. N. Swink, S. W. Duiker, K. J. Czymmek, D. B. Beegle, and W. J. Cox. 2015. Integrating cover crops
for nitrogen management in corn systems on northeastern U.S. dairies. Agronomy Journal 107 (4):1365–76.
doi:10.2134/agronj14.0385.
Kravchenko, A. N., G. P. Robertson, X. Hao, and D. G. Bullock. 2006. Management practice effects on surface total
carbon: Difference in spatial variability patterns. Agronomy Journal 98:1559–68. doi:10.2134/agronj2006.0066.
Kravchenko, A. N., G. P. Robertson, K. D. Thelen, and R. R. Harwood. 2005. Management, topographical, and weather
effects on spatial variability of crop grain yields. Agronomy Journal 98:1559–68. doi:10.2134/agronj2006.0066.
 COMMUNICATIONS IN SOIL SCIENCE AND PLANT ANALYSIS 1513

Martinez-Feria, R. A., R. Dietzel, M. Liebman, M. J. Helmers, and S. V. Archontoulis. 2016. Rye cover crop effects on
maize: A system-level analysis. Field Crops Research 196:145–59. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2016.06.016.
Maynard, D. G., Y. P. Kalra, and J. A. Crumbaugh. 2007. Nitrate and exchangeable ammonium nitrogen. In Soil sampling
and methods of analysis, ed. M. R. Carter and E. G. Gregorich, 71–80. 2nd ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Mehlich, A. 1984. Mehlich 3 soil test extractant: A modification of Mehlich 2 extractant. Communications in Soil Science
and Plant Analysis 15 (12):1409–16. doi:10.1080/00103628409367568.
Nyiraneza, J., B. Thompson, X. Geng, J. He, Y. Jiang, S. Fillmore, and K. Stiles. 2017. Changes in soil organic matter over
18 yr in Prince Edward Island, Canada. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 97 (4):745–56.
Parlak, M., and A. Özaslan Parlak. 2010. Measurement of splash erosion in different cover crops. Turkish Journal of Field
Crops 15 (2):169–73.
Plaza-Bonilla, D., J.-M. Nolot, S. Passot, D. Raffaillac, and E. Justes. 2016. Grain legume-based rotations managed under
conventional tillage need cover crops to mitigate soil organic matter losses. Soil and Tillage Research 156:33–43.
doi:10.1016/j.still.2015.09.021.
Roesch-McNally, G. E., A. D. Basche, J. G. Arbuckle, J. C. Tyndall, F. E. Miguez, T. Bowman, and R. Clay. 2017. The
trouble with cover crops: Farmers’ experiences with overcoming barriers to adoption. Renewable Agriculture and
Food Systems 33 (4):322–33. doi:10.1017/S1742170517000096.
Roth, R. T., M. D. Ruffatti, P. D. O’Rourke, and S. D. Armstrong. 2018. A cost analysis approach to valuing cover crop
environmental and nitrogen cycling benefits: A central Illinois on farm case study. Agricultural Systems 159:69–77.
doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2017.10.007.
SAS Institute. 2010. SAS OnlineDoc. Version 9.3. SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC.
Savard, M. M., D. Paradis, G. Somers, S. Liao, and E. van Bochove. 2007. Winter nitrification contributes to excess NO3
in groundwater of an agricultural region: A dual-isotope study. Water Resources Research 43 (6):1–10. doi:10.1029/
2006WR005469.
Snapp, S. S., S. M. Swinton, R. Labarta, D. Mutch, J. R. Black, R. Leep, J. Nyiraneza, and K. O’Neil. 2005. Evaluating cover
crops for benefits, costs and performance within cropping system niches. Agronomy Journal 97 (1):322–32.
Stark, J. C., and G. A. Porter. 2005. Potato nutrient management in sustainable cropping systems. American Journal of
Potato Research 82:329–38. doi:10.1007/BF02871963.
Statistics Canada. 2017. Farm and farm operator data. Government of Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/95-
640-x/2016001/article/14801-eng.htm.
Thorup-Kristensen, K., J. Magid, and L. Stoumann Jensen. 2003. Catch crops and green manures as biological tools in
nitrogen management in temperate zones. Advances in Agronomy 79:227–302.
Tonitto, C., M. B. David, and L. E. Drinkwater. 2006. Replacing bare fallows with cover crops in fertilizer-intensive
cropping systems: A meta-analysis of crop yield and N dynamics. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 112
(1):58–72. doi:10.1016/j.agee.2005.07.003.
Villamil, M. B., G. A. Bollero, R. G. Darmody, F. W. Simmons, and D. G. Bullock. 2006. No-till corn/soybean systems
including winter cover crops: Effects on soil properties. Soil Science Society of America Journal 70 (6):1936–44.
doi:10.2136/sssaj2005.0350.
Vos, J., and P. E. L. van der Putten. 2004. Nutrient cycling in a cropping system with potato, spring wheat, sugar beet,
oats and nitrogen catch crops. II. Effect of catch crops on nitrate leaching in autumn and winter. Nutrient Cycling in
Agroecosystems 70 (1):23–31. doi:10.1023/B:FRES.0000049358.24431.0d.
Zebarth, B. J., S. Danielescu, J. Nyiraneza, M. C. Ryan, Y. Jiang, M. Grimmett, and D. L. Burton. 2015. Controls on nitrate
loading and implications for BMPs under intensive potato production systems in Prince Edward Island, Canada.
Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation 35 (1):30–42. doi:10.1111/gwmr.12088.
Zebarth, B. J., C. F. Drury, N. Tremblay, and A. N. Cambouris. 2009. Opportunities for improved fertilizer nitrogen
management in production of arable crops in eastern Canada: A review. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 89
(2):113–32. doi:10.4141/CJSS07102.
Ziadi, N., R. R. Simard, G. Allard, and J. Lafond. 1999. Field evaluation of anion exchange membranes as an N soil testing
method for grasslands. Canadian Journal of Soil Science 79 (2):281–94. doi:10.4141/S98-062.