Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Strip tillage reduced husked-ear yield by 7% in 1982 versus conventional tillage.

A claim from Effect of Tillage on Sweet Corn Development and Yield · 1986

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Strip tillage reduced husked-ear yield by 7% in 1982 versus conventional tillage.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
strip tillagee0
Outcome
Yields of husked earse0
Direction
lowere0
Value
7%e0
Qualifier
1982e0
Comparator
conventional tillagee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSetting

Verbatim

e0

“Yields of husked ears from strip tillage were 7% and 16% lower than from conventional tillage in 1982 and 1983, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 475–599
t0

“Sweet Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–31

Title

Effect of Tillage on Sweet Corn Development and Yield

Kerry L. Petersen; Harry J. Mack; Dean E. Booster Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 1986. doi:10.21273/jashs.111.1.39

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-20dfcfb0bfee96efd9a9f986219a3e64a9f437b98af747b6e6532ebd0c8a5538 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 5 in the model’s answer

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

286 papers in the same direction as this claim · 812 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
    Rotary strip tillage increased corn yield by 900 kg·ha -1 relative to conventional tillage.

    Strip Tillage for Sweet Corn Production: Yield and Economic Return · 2002 · compared with conventional tillage

    Opposite directionCites this paper

  2. no effect
    No-tillage did not reduce yields from emerged seedlings on a per plant basis for any cover crop.

    Effects of Cover Crops, Nitrogen, and Tillage on Sweet Corn · 2002

    Same directionCites this paper

  3. positive
    No-tillage was associated with higher corn yields.

    Influence of No‐tillage on Soil Moisture1 · 1971

    Opposite direction

  4. positive
    CA improved maize grain yield, especially in two- or three-year rotations.

    ROTATION IN CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE SYSTEMS OF ZAMBIA: EFFECTS ON SOIL QUALITY AND WATER RELATIONS · 2010

    Opposite direction

  5. positive
    Subsoil tillage increased grain yield of spring maize by 12.8% on average compared with conventional soil treatment.

    Effect of subsoil tillage depth on nutrient accumulation, root distribution, and grain yield in spring maize · 2014 · compared with conventional soil treatment

    Opposite direction

  6. positive
    In 1983 strip or no tillage with soybean rotation raised corn grain yield by 12%.

    Influence of Tillage and Crop Rotation on Yields of Corn, Soybean, and Wheat · 1988

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    In Lemu, CA monocrop maize yielded 2.7 Mg ha −1 more than conventional tillage in 2009/10.

    Conservation agriculture systems for Malawian smallholder farmers: long-term effects on crop productivity, profitability and soil quality · 2012 · compared with conventional tillage

    Opposite direction

  8. positive
    Tillage increased corn yields.

    Long-term crop rotation and tillage effects on soil greenhouse gas emissions and crop production in Illinois, USA · 2018 · compared with no-tillage

    Opposite direction

1,090 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 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.