Cited by 46Sustainable Agricultural Systems AnalysisSoil Management and Crop YieldSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics

Carbon emissions and economic assessment of farm operations under different tillage practices in organic rainfed almond orchards in semiarid Mediterranean conditions

Open access
Martin-Gorriz, Bernardo, Maestre-Valero, José F., Almagro, María, Boix-Fayos, Carolina, Martínez-Mena, María·2020·Scientia Horticulturae

Abstract

Sustainable land management practices, such as reduced tillage or crop diversification, are potentially efficient measures to fight against soil degradation and desertification. The decision to approve these practices must be justified by both integrated environmental and economic assessment studies. In this work, we analysed the carbon emissions associated to farm operations and economic profitability for two organic rainfed almond (Prunus dulcis Mill.) farms under semiarid conditions. In the analysis, we considered the following soil management strategies: conventional tillage (CT); reduced tillage (RT); reduced tillage plus green manure (RTG); and no tillage (NT). A cradle-to-farm gate life cycle assessment (LCA) was applied based on long-term data from two farms. The results obtained showed that the NT strategy provided, as expected, the lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but that its yield was also the lowest, which negatively affects its economic viability even with the consideration of subsidies. The RT strategy reduced GHG emissions and improved the ratio of profit/GHG emissions, whilst the RTG strategy increased GHG emissions and reduced the ratio of profit/GHG emissions as a consequence of using seeds. In conclusion, it has been demonstrated that some level of reduced tillage leads to environmental and economic benefits with respect to conventional tillage in organic rainfed almond orchards under semiarid conditions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scienta.2019.108978

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martin-Gorriz, B., Maestre-Valero, J. F., Almagro, M., Boix-Fayos, C., & Martínez-Mena, M.
Affiliations
  • Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena (ES)
  • Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (ES)
Venue
Scientia Horticulturae
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-02
Volume
261
Pages
108978
ISSN
0304-4238 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2989850013
Cited by
46
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5
FWCI
2.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
erratum (2021-05-10)
Open access
Locations
  • Scientia Horticulturae (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DIGITAL.CSIC (Spanish National Research Council (CSIC)) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Fundación Séneca
  • Agencia Estatal de Investigación
  • European Commission
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Sustainable Agricultural Systems Analysis
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Management and Crop Yield
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Keywords
CO2 emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, reduced tillage, no-tillage, conventional tillage, green manure, organic farming, almond, economic profitability, life cycle assessment, cradle-to-farm-gate, sustainable land management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review