Surface and Subsurface Phosphorus Discharge from a Clay Soil in a Nine-Year Study Comparing No-Till and Plowing

No-till as a water protection measure is highly efficient in controlling erosion and particulate P (PP) loss but tends to increase dissolved reactive P (DRP) concentrations in runoff water. In a 9-yr field study on a clay soil in Southwest Finland, the effects of no-till and autumn plowing on surface runoff and subsurface drainage water quality were compared. The site had a 2% slope and was under spring cereal cropping, with approximately replacement fertilizer P rates. Vertical stratification of soil-test P that had developed during a preceding 6-yr grass ley was undone by plowing but continued to develop under no-till. During the 9-yr study period, no-till soil had 27% lower cumulative total P losses than plowed soil (10.0 vs. 13.7 kg total P ha−1). Concentrations and losses of PP were clearly lower under no-till than under plowing (5.6 vs. 12.3 kg PP ha−1), but DRP loss showed the opposite trend (4.3 vs. 1.4 kg DRP ha−1). There was an increasing trend in subsurface drainflow DRP concentration under no-till, possibly because of development of a conductive pore structure from soil surface to drain depth. The potential benefit of no-till in water protection depends on how much of the PP transported to water is transformed into a bioavailable form and used by aquatic organisms. The beneficial effect of no-till in controlling P-induced eutrophication at the study site would only be realized if the bioavailable share of PP exceeds 43%. Otherwise, no-till would not be an efficient eutrophication control measure at this site.