Claim · model-written summary
Improved weed control reduced the simulated yield gap by 5–9 Mg ha−1.
- Taxon
- Sugarcanee1
- Treatment
- improved weed controle0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- yield gape0
- Direction
- reducee0
- Value
- 5–9 Mg ha−1e0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier
Verbatim
e0“reduce the estimated yield gap (55 Mg ha-1) by increasing nitrogen (N) fertiliser rates (30 Mg ha−1), liming (25 Mg ha−1), improved weed control (5–9 Mg ha−1)”
e1“Sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum L.)”
Title
Elizabeth A. Meier; Diogenes L. Antille; Santiago Mahimairaja Farming System 2023. doi:10.1016/j.farsys.2023.100048
Other claims from this paper (11)
- Observation The estimated sugarcane yield gap was 55 Mg ha-1.
- Intervention effect Increased nitrogen fertiliser rate reduced the simulated yield gap by 30 Mg ha−1.
- Intervention effect Liming reduced the simulated yield gap by 25 Mg ha−1.
- Intervention effect Replacing uncropped fallow with legume crops reduced the simulated yield gap by 2–3 Mg ha−1.
- Intervention effect Changing crop cycle duration produced no simulated yield gap gain.
- Intervention effect Retaining crop residues worsened the simulated yield gap by −2 Mg ha−1.
- Observation Yield benefit from conservation practices was similar across projected warmer and wetter or drier, and hotter and wetter climates.
- Intervention effect Liming gave one of the greatest projected yield benefits under a hotter and drier climate.
- Intervention effect Weed control gave one of the greatest projected yield benefits under a hotter and drier climate.
- Intervention effect Retaining crop residues gave one of the greatest projected yield benefits under a hotter and drier climate.
- Method / resource Daily weather data availability limited the modelling study.