The impact of adopting inversion tillage or non-inversion tillage approaches in cereal production systems is now better understood, thanks to a new report from AHDB.

The report draws conclusions from a series of long-term field experiments, which were used to compare the two approaches in various rotational and soil-type settings at sites in England and Scotland.

Although yields were marginally lower in the non-inversion system, a reduction in costs (labour and fuel) meant that non-inversion tillage could be advocated under 'normal' conditions.

Consistent with published findings on no-till, however, non-inversion approaches were found to be more vulnerable to grass weed control challenges, which limits its blanket application.

As part of the research, soil cores were extracted throughout the season at the trial sites. These were then analysed to measure the effect of tillage on soil quality and function.

A key finding was that, after corrections for soil bulk density and stone content, no advantage in carbon sequestration was detected with non-inversion approaches.

Soil physical condition was also found to be well below optimal at all the sites used to examine tillage approaches, at a level sufficient to impede root proliferation. The findings provide further evidence of the need to find practical ways to measure and improve soil health.