Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Vertically rotary sub-soiling tillage increased maize grain yield by 13.7%-33.6% relative to TT in 2016 and 2017.

A claim from Effects of different tillage methods on maize water utilization and yield under double ridge-furrow and plastic mulching on semi-arid area of northwest China · 2021

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Vertically rotary sub-soiling tillage increased maize grain yield by 13.7%-33.6% relative to TT in 2016 and 2017.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse4
Treatment
vertically rotary sub-soiling tillagee1
Outcome
maize grain yielde7
Direction
increasede7
Value
13.7%-33.6%e7
Qualifier
in 2016 and 2017e7
Comparator
TTe7

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSetting

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

e1

“vertically rotary sub-soiling tillage for 40 cm depth (VRT)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1106–1165
e4

“water use efficiency of maize on semiarid rain-fed area of northwest Loess Plateau”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 819–901
e7

“the VRT increased maize grain yield by 12.0%-13.0%, 13.7%-33.6%, 24.0%-47.4% in 2016 and 2017, as compared with SS, TT and ZT, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2342–2481

Title

Effects of different tillage methods on maize water utilization and yield under double ridge-furrow and plastic mulching on semi-arid area of northwest China

张绪成,马一凡,王红丽,侯慧芝,于显枫,方彦杰,汤瑛芳 ZHANG Xucheng Acta Ecologica Sinica 2021. doi:10.5846/stxb202001270176

Other claims from this paper (11)

Record rev-d72c5b489bbbdc2116e22b86a5ba11fa325dd6ea827b89eab0601b25ea703de4 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 7 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
  2. negative
  3. no effect
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. negative
  7. no effect
  8. negative

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.