Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Maize rotation introduced into cotton monocultures improved lint yields.

A claim from Sowing maize as a rotation crop in irrigated cotton cropping systems in a Vertosol: effects on soil properties, greenhouse gas emissions, black root rot incidence, cotton lint yield and fibre quality · 2019

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Maize rotation introduced into cotton monocultures improved lint yields.

Treatment
Maize rotation introduced into cotton monoculturese1
Outcome
lint yieldse1
Direction
improvede1
Comparator
cotton monoculturese1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Sowing maize as a rotation crop in irrigated cotton cropping systems”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–68
e1

“Maize rotation introduced into cotton monocultures improved lint yields and reduced greenhouse gas emissions but had little impact in a minimum-tilled cotton–wheat rotation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1914–2086

Title

Sowing maize as a rotation crop in irrigated cotton cropping systems in a Vertosol: effects on soil properties, greenhouse gas emissions, black root rot incidence, cotton lint yield and fibre quality

N. R. Hulugalle; G. Nachimuthu; K. Kirkby; et al. Soil Research 2019. doi:10.1071/sr19242

Other claims from this paper (15)

Record rev-1d6cc28af89e5bdbf0bc7628effb5ead4f575f2f9eacbe7013b5f322241c1dae · schema claims-v0.9 · position 12 in the model’s answer

Zea mays · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 10 positive, 1 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this claim · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

rotation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

43 papers: 26 positive, 17 negative or no effect

25 papers in the same direction as this claim · 12 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. no effect
  7. no effect
  8. no effect

34 papers more in this group

See all 43 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.