Intervention effectmodel-written summary

No-tillage increased sweet corn commercial ear yield by 21.80%.

A claim from AGRONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF IRRIGATED CROP ROTATIONS UNDER CONVENTIONAL AND NO-TILLAGE SYSTEMS IN THE SEMIARID REGION OF MINAS GERAIS, BRAZIL · 2022

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

No-tillage increased sweet corn commercial ear yield by 21.80%.

Taxon
sweet corne4
Treatment
NTSe4
Outcome
sweet corn total and commercial ear yielde4
Direction
increasese4
Value
21.80%e4
Comparator
CTSe1

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

Verbatim

e1

“The treatments, in both experiments, consisted of two tillage systems (CTS and NTS) arranged in strip-plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 407–514
e4

“NTS increases the sorghum fresh and dry matter yields in 39.65% and 84.26%, respectively, in the sorghum- sweet corn rotation, and the sweet corn total and commercial ear yield in 11.99% and 21.80%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1055–1266

Title

AGRONOMIC PERFORMANCE OF IRRIGATED CROP ROTATIONS UNDER CONVENTIONAL AND NO-TILLAGE SYSTEMS IN THE SEMIARID REGION OF MINAS GERAIS, BRAZIL

JOÃO VÍCTOR SANTOS GUERRA; ABNER JOSÉ DE CARVALHO; ARLEY FIGUEIREDO PORTUGAL; et al. Revista Caatinga 2022. doi:10.1590/1983-21252022v35n104rc

Other claims from this paper (6)

Record rev-37c8d44e8b642e79973fae0751e78148d92a4a14103e0ab15164696e06a08d9d · schema claims-v0.9 · position 6 in the model’s answer

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

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

811 papers in the same direction as this claim · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
    No tillage with URAN yielded 10.03 ton/ha, 28.9% more than conventional tillage with URAN.

    Responses of corn physiology and yield to six agricultural practices over three years in middle Tennessee · 2016 · compared with CT-URAN

    Same directionCited by this paper

  2. no effect
    Cover-crop no-tillage and standard no-tillage gave similar corn yields.

    Potential Long‐Term Benefits of No‐Tillage and Organic Cropping Systems for Grain Production and Soil Improvement · 2007 · compared with NT

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    No-till produced less corn grain than plow tillage.

    Tillage and Rotation Interactions for Corn and Soybean Grain Yield as Affected by Precipitation and Air Temperature · 2004 · compared with plow

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Tillage had no grain-yield effect in manure or compost plots in three of four years.

    Composted and Noncomposted Manure Application to Conventional and No‐Tillage Systems: Corn Yield and Nitrogen Uptake · 1999

    Opposite direction

  5. negative
    No-tillage corn grain yield was 5% lower than under conventional tillage.

    Corn and Soybean Response to Rotation Sequence, Row Spacing, and Tillage System · 2003 · compared with conventional tillage system

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Continuous no-till corn on Chalmers soil was 2% wetter at harvest than plowed corn.

    Long‐Term Tillage and Rotation Effects on Corn Growth and Yield on High and Low Organic Matter, Poorly Drained Soils · 1988 · compared with plowing

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    No-tillage without red clover reduced corn grain yield by 13% versus conventional tillage over three years.

    Red Clover and Tillage Influence on Soil Temperature, Water Content, and Corn Emergence · 1999 · compared with conventional tillage treatment

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    A significant tillage x year interaction indicated equal continuous corn yields for CT and NT in the first 2 years.

    Corn Production as Affected by Tillage System and Starter Fertilizer · 2002 · compared with NT

    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.