Skip to main content
. 2022 Nov 21;13:1024606. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2022.1024606

Table 4.

Components of the vineyard’s net primary production (NPP as t ha-1 of dry matter), the whole vine’s net carbon balance (NCB), and the vineyard’s net ecosystem carbon balance (NECB) calculated over the 2-year study for six different cover crop and tillage systems.a,b.

Treatment Harvest (Mg C ha-1) Pruning wood (Mg C ha-1) Leaves (Mg C ha-1) Permanent organs (Mg C ha-1) Grapevine NPP (Mg C ha-1 year-1) Rs Under vine (Mg C ha-1 year-1) Grapevine NCB (Mg C year-1) Cover Crop NPP (Mg C ha-1) Rs Interrow (Mg C ha-1 year-1) SOC (Mg C ha-1) NECB (Mg C ha-1 year-1)
Tillage (T) Cover crop (CC)
Fresno County (Five points)
2020
NT AG 1.39 1.76 3.02 11.5 17.7 1.84 15.35 1.80 2.81 17.71 23.36
PG 1.41 1.30 2.97 11.5 17.2 1.84 14.83 1.70 4.02 19.25 22.96
RV 1.32 1.73 3.53 11.5 18.1 1.84 15.82 2.30 3.94 17.64 23.5
CT AG 1.25 1.75 3.22 11.5 17.7 1.84 15.54 3.93 3.39 19.81 25.31
PG 1.48 1.56 3.27 11.5 17.8 1.84 15.39 1.83 3.42 18.97 23.74
RV 1.65 2.17 2.93 11.5 18.3 1.84 15.66 1.17 3.74 17.64 22.89
2021
NT AG 1.24 1.61 2.98 11.5 17.3 2.96 14.56 2.00 3.71 17.71 22.24
PG 1.63 1.25 2.92 11.5 17.3 2.96 14.15 2.15 3.69 19.32 22.69
RV 1.80 1.53 3.48 11.5 18.3 2.96 14.99 1.83 3.81 17.71 22.54
CT AG 1.11 1.75 3.18 11.5 17.6 2.96 14.91 4.08 5.81 19.88 23.63
PG 1.21 1.50 3.09 11.5 17.3 2.96 14.58 2.07 5.06 18.97 22.25
RV 1.34 2.01 2.88 11.5 17.8 2.96 14.88 1.33 3.98 17.36 21.94
CC ns * * -- ns -- ns ** ns ns ns
T ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
CC × T ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Year ns ns ns ns * * ns ns ns
Year × CC ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Year × T ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Year × CC × T ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Napa County (Oakville)
2020
NT AG 0.15 0.37 0.57 6.7 7.8 3.71 5.71 2.92 5.56 29.25 18.49
PG 0.17 0.21 0.49 6.7 7.6 3.71 5.47 0.96 5.89 28.28 16.68
RV 0.14 0.43 0.44 6.7 7.7 3.71 5.63 2.59 4.73 28.76 18.41
CT AG 0.16 0.51 0.55 6.7 7.9 3.71 5.83 2.96 6.85 29.25 18.00
PG 0.16 0.32 0.64 6.7 7.8 3.71 5.72 1.19 5.82 27.30 16.61
RV 0.16 0.77 0.74 6.7 8.4 3.71 6.29 3.20 5.50 27.30 18.29
2021
NT AG 0.44 0.56 0.61 7.0 8.6 4.40 5.88 3.20 7.25 28.76 17.74
PG 0.33 0.39 0.53 7.0 8.3 4.40 5.63 1.62 7.70 27.79 16.05
RV 0.26 0.62 0.47 7.0 8.3 4.40 5.80 3.60 6.68 30.23 18.83
CT AG 0.37 0.68 0.58 7.0 8.6 4.40 5.97 3.32 7.48 27.30 17.08
PG 0.38 0.48 0.67 7.0 8.5 4.40 5.86 1.47 7.75 26.81 15.72
RV 0.46 0.96 0.77 7.0 9.2 4.40 6.45 3.46 5.64 26.81 18.27
CC ns ns ns -- * -- ** ** ns ns ***
T ns ** * *** *** ns ** ** *
CC × T ns ns ns * * ns ns ns ns
Year *** ** ns *** ns ns ns ns *
Year × CC ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Year × T ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Year × CC × T ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns

a ANOVA was used to compare data (p-value indicated). Letters within columns indicate significant mean separation according to Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD) test (at p = 0.05), where *: p-value < 0.05; **: p-value < 0.001, and ***: p-value < 0.0001. b NT, no tillage; CT, conventional tillage; AG, annual grass; RV, residual vegetation; PG, perennial grass; NPP; net primary production; NCB, net carbon balance; Rs, respiration; SOC, soil organic carbon; NECB, net ecosystem carbon balance; ns, not significant; and --: not applicable.