Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Combined tillage raised soybean yield to 2.25 t/ha, against 1.94 t/ha under minimum tillage.

A claim from CROP STRUCTURE AND YIELD OF GRAIN LEGUMES DEPENDING ON AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE FOREST-STEPPE ZONE OF THE VOLGA REGION · 2021

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined tillage raised soybean yield to 2.25 t/ha, against 1.94 t/ha under minimum tillage.

Taxon
soybeansGlycine maxe3
Treatment
combined tillagee3
Outcome
yielde3
Direction
highere3
Value
2,25 t/hae3
Qualifier
1.94 t/hae3
Comparator
minimume3

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSetting

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

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e3

“The effect of combined tillage on soybeans was also higher than on the minimum, where the yield was 2,25 t/ha and 1.94 t/ha, respectively”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 441–582

Title

CROP STRUCTURE AND YIELD OF GRAIN LEGUMES DEPENDING ON AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE FOREST-STEPPE ZONE OF THE VOLGA REGION

Timirâzevskaâ selʹskohozâjstvennaâ akademiâ; Rezida Akhmetovna Mustafina Russian State Agrarian University-Moscow State Agricultural Academy named after K. A. Timiryazev 2021. doi:10.26897/978-5-9675-1855-3-2021-205

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-2a05e1d2f117bec1d8e0de042c2e1a7d07e5377d1d8de8c7f2c3560f55c66018 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

tillage · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results

390 papers: 264 positive, 126 negative or no effect

263 papers in the same direction as this claim · 100 in the opposite direction · 26 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
    Soybean yields were similar under conventional and no tillage.

    Cover crop, tillage, and herbicide effects on weeds, soil properties, microbial populations, and soybean yield · 2003 · compared with NT

    Opposite direction

  2. no effect
    The seedbed tillage method and herbicide treatments did not significantly affect soybean yields in 1976.

    Seedbed Tillage and Herbicide Influence on Soybean (Glycine max) Weed Control and Yield · 1979

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    Average no-till yields of soybean were similar to conventional tillage yields.

    Corn/Soybean Rotation Effect as Influenced by Tillage, Nitrogen, and Hybrid/Cultivar · 1991 · compared with CT

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Twenty-year mean soybean yield was reduced by 4 to 7% under chisel, ridge and no-till systems in both rotation and monoculture compared with plowing.

    Effect of Tillage and Rotation on Agronomic Performance of Corn and Soybean: Twenty‐Year Study on Dark Silty Clay Loam Soil · 1996 · compared with plowing

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Tillage systems did not significantly affect soybean yield in rotation.

    Tillage for Continuous Corn and Corn-Soybean Rotation · 1982

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Soybean yield was not affected by tillage systems under weed-free conditions.

    Influence of Tillage Systems on Annual Weed Densities and Control in Solid-seeded Soybean (Glycine max) · 1990

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    No-till yielded 1.1 t ha−1, lower than reduced tillage.

    Weed Control Using Conventional Tillage, Reduced Tillage, No-Tillage, and Cover Crops in Organic Soybean · 2017 · compared with RT

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    No tillage had reduced grain yields, indicating lower carbon inputs.

    Carbon and Nitrogen Storage are Greater under Biennial Tillage in a Minnesota Corn–Soybean Rotation · 2006

    Opposite direction

381 papers more in this group

See all 390 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.