Claim · model-written summary
Forage and sowing methods did not influence macronutrient release from crop residues over 120 days.
- Treatment
- Forage and sowing methodse0
- Outcome
- macronutrient release rate from crop residuese0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
- Qualifier
- for 120 days after desiccatione0
Zea maysNot reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Forage and sowing methods did not influence the macronutrient release rate from crop residues for 120 days after desiccation”
t0“Maize”
Title
Francisco Cézar Belchor Lages Pereira; Luiz Malcolm Mano de Mello; Cristiano Magalhães Pariz; et al. Revista Brasileira de Ciência do Solo 2016. doi:10.1590/18069657rbcs20150003
Other claims from this paper (10)
- Intervention effect Furrow sowing raised total maize residues relative to V4 sowing.
- Intervention effect Broadcast sowing raised total maize residues relative to V4 sowing.
- Intervention effect Intercropping increased residue amount over maize monoculture regardless of forage or sowing method.
- Intervention effect Forage type and sowing method did not influence nutrient accumulation in residues at desiccation.
- Observation Congo grass residues had the lowest lignin/total N ratio.
- Observation N, P, K and Mg release followed a logarithmic pattern.
- Observation Ca and S release followed an exponential pattern.
- Intervention effect Forage and sowing methods did not influence yield components or grain yield of subsequent soybean.
- Intervention effect Intercropping increased subsequent soybean grain yield relative to soybean after maize monoculture.
- Observation Intercropping preserved soil chemical and physical properties.