## 3 Results
### Physical Properties  
First, we analysed the variability of physical soil parameters \(W_{i}\), \(\rho_{d}\) and \(\theta_{i}\) in the different LTAEs. Regarding the LTAE NewSmoca plots, Figure 4 shows the average values of the three physical parameters for the sampling depths of 0-5 cm and 5-10 cm, respectively. The histograms also show the error bars in terms of confidence intervals and the letters associated with [PERSON]'s 5% significance test (equal letter indicates non-significant differences), applied after a one-way ANOVA. The greatest variability is found in the first 5 cm layer. In particular, the INT+ treatment denotes significantly higher moisture and bulk density values than the other two. These, in turn, are very similar in water content, but the bulk density is lower for the organic treatment. In the 5-10 cm layer, no significant differences in \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**LTAE** & **Treatment** & \
\begin{tabular}{c} **SOC (Mean)** \\ **(\%)** \\ \end{tabular} &
\begin{tabular}{c} **SOC (sd)** \\ **(\%)** \\ \end{tabular} \\ \hline NewSmoca & INT+ & 2.09 & 0.38 \\ NewSmoca & INT & 0.74 & 0.01 \\ NewSmoca & ORG & 0.80 & 0.03 \\ Rotation & BiFV\_R & 0.84 & 0.08 \\ Rotation & BiFM\_R & 0.77 & 0.06 \\ Rotation & MoF\_R & 0.95 & 0.12 \\ Rotation & BiFV\_B & 0.98 & 0.03 \\ Rotation & BiFM\_B & 0.81 & 0.14 \\ Rotation & MoF\_B & 0.98 & 0.07 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Mean and standard deviation (sd) of the Soil Organic Content (SOC, %) in the soil samples collected from the Ap horizon in the plots under different treatments in the considered Long-term Agroecosystem Experiment (LTAE). Figure 3: Mean percentages of sand, silt and clay particles for the plot considered in each Long-term Agroecosystem Experiment (LTAE). The plots correspond to those in Figure 1 in order from left to right. The acronyms indicate different soil, crop or residue management (see the text for detailed descriptions). moisture content are found, while the differences in bulk density are confirmed, albeit less markedly than in the surface layer. For the LTAE Rotation, the analysis was performed by a two-way ANOVA considering the factors Rotation Type (RT, 3-level factor: MoF, BiFM, BiFV), Residual Management (RM, 2-level factor: buried, B; removed, R) and their interaction. Figure 4: Mean values and error bars (95% confidence interval of the mean) of soil physical properties \(\mathrm{W_{i}}\), \(\mathrm{\rho_{d}}\) and \(\mathrm{\theta_{i}}\) deriving from the samples collected in the 0–5 cm and 5–10 cm soil layers of the LTAE NewSmoca. Different letters are significantly different means according to a one-way ANOVA and Tukey’s test (0.05 significance level). The abbreviations INT+, INT and ORG indicate different soil and crop management practices (details are given in the text). Figure 5 shows the mean values and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals of \(\rm W_{i}\), \(\rm\rho_{d}\) and \(\rm\theta_{i}\) for each RT-RM combination. Figure 5: Mean values and error bars (95% confidence interval of the mean) of soil physical properties \(\rm W_{i}\), \(\rm\rho_{d}\) and \(\rm\theta_{i}\) of soil samples collected in the layers 0–5 cm and 5–10 cm of the LTAE Rotation. Different letters are significantly different means according to a two-way ANOVA and [PERSON]’s test (0.05 significance level). The abbreviations BiFM, BiFV and MoF indicate different crop rotations (details are given in the text). The letters R and B indicate the removed and buried crop residuals, respectively. For the 0-5 cm layer, the analysis indicates a significant effect (\(p\)-value = 0.03) of the Residual Management factor on \(\rho_{\rm d}\), which exhibits a mean value lower in the buried than in the removed treatment (1.28 vs. 1.35 g/cm\({}^{3}\)). No significant effects are associated with Rotation Type, nor with the RT-RM interaction. For the 5-10 cm horizon, the situation is more complex.