Intervention effectmodel-written summary

A tillage depth of 15 cm was significantly superior to depths of 20 and 25 cm for all studied conditions.

A claim from A review: Machine relationship with the tractor and its effect on the productivity and compaction of agricultural soil · 2023

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

A tillage depth of 15 cm was significantly superior to depths of 20 and 25 cm for all studied conditions.

Taxon
corn (Zea mays L)Zea mayse1
Treatment
TD of 15cme0
Outcome
roots dry weight, PVI and the crop productivity (CP)e2
Direction
superiore0
Comparator
20 and 25 cme0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“TD of 15cm was significantly superior to the levels of 20 and 25 cm in all studied conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 838–932
e1

“corn (Zea mays L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 74–91
e2

“the plant characteristics represented the roots dry weight, PVI and the crop productivity (CP)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–714

Title

A review: Machine relationship with the tractor and its effect on the productivity and compaction of agricultural soil

Hussein Abbas Jebur University of Thi-Qar Journal of agricultural research 2023. doi:10.54174/utjagr.v12i1.237

Other claims from this paper (1)

Record rev-bfe87a6322a9e69ab02dfbfef00feb158da5d21180fecba74f70cc2affbeebe0 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 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. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. negative
    Soil compaction markedly reduced corn growth and yield.

    Soil Compaction in the Field and Corn Growth1 · 1962

    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.