Cover crop research review: How can it help almonds?

Cynthia Crézé (1), Jeffrey Mitchell (1), Andreas Westphal (2), Danielle Lightle (3), David Doll (3), Mohammad Yaghmour (3), Neal Williams (4), Amanda Hodson(4), Houston Wilson (5), Kent Daane (6), Brad Hanson (1), Steven Haring (1), Cameron Zuber (3) & Amélie Gaudin (1) Department of Plant Sciences, University of California – Davis Department of Nematology, University of California – Riverside University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources – Cooperative Extension Department of Entomology and Nematology, University of California – Davis Department of Entomology, University of California – Riverside Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California – Berkeley Although cover cropping is compatible with almond production and is often implemented in other orchard systems, this practice has never been widely implemented in California. The potential benefits are recognized by growers, especially their value for pollinator forage and soil health but operational concerns, lack of cost-benefit analyses and unclear best management practices have hampered wide adoption. As cover cropping can provide significant sustainability benefits, there is an urgent need to assess and develop feasible and beneficial cover crop systems for California almond production. Here is some insight gathered by a research team assessing the impacts of multiple cover crop management strategies on: 1) soil health, 2) water use and dynamics, 3) bee visitation and pollination, 4) weed and pest pressure (NOW) and 5) almond yields in four orchards across the Central Valley precipitation gradient. Cover crop research trial in almond: Project website: https://almondcovercrop.faculty.ucdavis.edu Design: Three commercial orchards in Corning (Tehama county, 2nd leaf), Merced (Merced county, 16th leaf) and Arvin (Kern county, 16th leaf). One experimental station: Kearney (Fresno county). Two cover crops: Soil Mix (2 legumes, 2 brassicas & 1 grass), Pollinator Mix (5 brassicas, Project Apis M – https://www.projectapism.org/pam-mustard-mix.html) Compared to resident vegetation & to bare soil. Cover

Read More

Whole Orchard Soil Re-incorporation: an Alternative Orchard Removal Strategy

Written by Brent Holtz (UCCE San Joaquin) and David Doll (UCCE Merced) You may have heard the news—co-generation plants are limiting the amount of chipped biomass they are accepting.  This is reducing the rate in which old orchards are removed, impacting the orchard redevelopment process. The soil incorporation of chipped or ground almond, peach, plum, or cherry trees during orchard removal could provide an alternative to co-generation plant or burning and could add valuable organic matter to our San Joaquin Valley soils.  Traditionally, many growers feared that wood chips or grindings would stunt tree growth by either allelopathic compounds or reduced nitrogen availability due to the high carbon to nitrogen ratio.  Interestingly enough, recent research has found this not to be true if the ground material is spread across and incorporated into the soil In 2008, University of California Farm Advisors and a USDA Plant Pathologist undertook a project at the UC Kearney Research and Extension center to compare the grinding of whole trees with burning as a means of orchard removal.  Twenty-two rows of an experimental orchard on nemaguard rootstock were used in a randomized blocked experiment with two main treatments, whole tree grinding and incorporation into the soil with ‘The Iron Wolf,’ a 50-ton rototiller, versus tree pushing and burning.  We examined second-generation orchard growth and hypothesized that soils amended with woody debris will sequester carbon at a higher rate, have higher levels of soil organic matter, increased soil fertility, and increased water retention.  Second generation almond trees (Nonpareil, Carmel, Butte) were planted in January/February 2009. The whole tree grinding did not stunt replanted tree growth.  In 2015, Greater yields were ultimately observed in the grind treatment, when compared to the burn (previous year’s yields were similar). In 2013, 2014, and 2015, soil analysis revealed  significantly more calcium,

Read More