Skip to main content

When Research and Applied Science Comes Together: The Benefits of No-Till Agriculture

Beltsville, MD

On December 8th, USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) staff met with USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists in Beltsville, MD, to visit the Farming Systems Project (FSP) to observe how various farm management approaches affect soil health. 

NRCS staff included Elizabeth Marks and Nathan Lowder, both Regional Soil Health Specialist in the NRCS Soil Health Division; and Dana Rushovich, NRCS - MD State Agronomist and Julie McGivern, NRCS - CT State Agronomist. ARS staff included Dr. Michel Cavigelli, Research Soil Scientist, Dr. Kate White, ARS Fellow with the USDA Northeast Climate Hub, and Dr. Harry Schomberg, Research Agronomist. The FSP is comparing five different cropping systems: conventionally managed chisel tillage, conventionally managed no-till, and three chisel-tilled organic systems on soil properties and yield.  Results have been summarized in a series of reports and can be found on the ARS-Sustainable Agricultural Systems Laboratory website.

USDA Northeast Climate Hub collaborating partners Dr. Kate White (ARS), Elizabeth Marks (NRCS) and Northeast Climate Hub co-director Dr. Michel Cavigelli (ARS). Research done by ARS can help NRCS planners support farmers with the latest information on growing systems.

Caption: USDA Northeast Climate Hub collaborating partners Dr. Kate White (ARS), Elizabeth Marks (NRCS) and Northeast Climate Hub co-director Dr. Michel Cavigelli (ARS).  Research done by ARS can help NRCS planners support farmers with the latest information on growing systems. | Photo by USDA NRCS

Minimizing soil disturbance, which includes limiting tillage, is one of the core principles of soil health. 

Tillage breaks up soil aggregates which may negatively impact living soil organisms that play an important role in nutrient cycling and soil aggregate stability. Increasing the stability of soil aggregates in the presence of water helps improve water infiltration and storage, air exchange, plant root growth, soil organism habitat, soil organic matter protection, loss of soil to erosion, nutrient cycling, plant productivity and health as well as water quality and flooding. Aggregate stability is increasingly important in the Northeast as we are seeing an increase in average rainfall and rainfall intensity (higher amounts of rainfall in a shorter time period) with climate change. 

Results of the slump or strainer test. Soils from three different management systems (left to right: tilled conventional, tilled organic, and no-till) were put in a kitchen strainer and placed in water. The cloudier the water, the less aggregate stability.

Caption: Results of the slump or strainer test. Soils from three different management systems (left to right: tilled conventional, tilled organic, and no-till) were put in a kitchen strainer and placed in water. The cloudier the water, the less aggregate stability. | Photo by USDA NRCS

For a qualitative look at the difference in the study treatments, during the December 8th visit, NRCS staff collected representative soil samples from three systems with similar crop rotations: conventional chisel tillage, organic chisel tillage, and conventional no-till. Filling a kitchen strainer with the soil, it was then placed in a cup of water for about one minute. Immediately, the difference between the soils was evident. The water with the conventionally managed chisel tilled soils became very cloudy with suspended soil while the water cup holding the no-tilled soil was much clearer; results for the organically managed tilled soil were intermediate but more like no-till than conventionally managed tilled soil. It was a visual representation that no-till soils had the greatest biological activity and the lowest physical disturbance and therefore more aggregate stability, followed by the tilled organically managed soils and the conventionally managed soils with tillage with the least aggregate stability.

After sitting in water for about a minute, the strainers are overturned onto a flat surface. The conventionally tilled soil on the far left did not hold its shape, indicating low aggregate stability and likely less biological activity. The soil that held its shape the best was the no-till soil on the far right.

Caption: After sitting in water for about a minute, the strainers are overturned onto a flat surface. The conventionally tilled soil on the far left did not hold its shape, indicating low aggregate stability and likely less biological activity. The soil that held its shape the best was the no-till soil on the far right. | Photo by USDA NRCS

Not only is no-till better for soil health, it can also benefit a farmer’s bottom line.

According to a recently published paper co-authored by ARS, NRCS, and the Northeast Climate Hub using data from the same study plots, on average, no-till adoption increased long-term net returns by $37.12 per acre relative to conventional till. Most of the cost savings were realized due to less tractor use and labor costs with no-till. Dig deeper into this research by reading either the research publication, 2-page summary factsheet, or head over to the project's webpage, Economics of Long-term Soil Health Practices.

For more information about how to assess the health of your soils, including how to do the strainer or slump test, read USDA NRCS’s Technical Note 450-06: Cropland In-Field Soil Health Assessment. NRCS provides technical and financial assistance for eligible farmers to improve soil health using conservation practices that minimize soil disturbance and maximizes soil cover, biodiversity, and presence of living roots. To apply, please contact your local NRCS office.