Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Seeding rate 120 kg ha-1 with conservation tillage gave the best grain yield, 405.02 gm.m-2 at Talkef.

A claim from EFFECT OF TILLAGE SYSTEM AND SEEDING RATES ON GROWTH AND WHEAT YIELD Triticum aestivum L. AND ITS ASSOCIATED WEEDS. · 2020

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seeding rate 120 kg ha-1 with conservation tillage gave the best grain yield, 405.02 gm.m-2 at Talkef.

Taxon
Triticum aestivumTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
seeding rates 120 kg.h-1 and conservation tillagee7
Outcome
grains yielde7
Direction
beste7
Value
405.02 gm.m-2e7
Setting
Talkefe7

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorQualifier

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Triticum aestivum L.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 69–89
e7

“The best grains yield obtain with seeding rates 120 kg.h-1 and conservation tillage by 314.62 and 405.02 gm.m-2 in Hamdaniya and Talkef locations respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1566–1724

Title

EFFECT OF TILLAGE SYSTEM AND SEEDING RATES ON GROWTH AND WHEAT YIELD Triticum aestivum L. AND ITS ASSOCIATED WEEDS.

Salim Antar; ahmed AL-Mashadanee Mağallaẗ zirāʿaẗ al-rāfidayn 2020. doi:10.33899/magrj.2020.127335.1047

Other claims from this paper (9)

Record rev-e16b386a6e5fb2ffa13323ea65f37c2477df3b3774a533cd889230e429e2c4db · schema claims-v0.9 · position 10 in the model’s answer

density · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

498 papers: 376 positive, 122 negative or no effect

375 papers in the same direction as this claim · 115 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
    Sowing density did not affect yield in 2000.

    Field evaluation of early vigour for genetic improvement of grain yield in wheat · 2002

    Opposite direction

  2. no effect
    Spacing changes did not significantly affect grain yield.

    Genotype, sowing date and plant spacing influence on high-yielding irrigated wheat in southern New South Wales. II. Growth, yield and nitrogen use · 1990

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    Nitrogen level, N timing and seeding rate had no significant effect on spring wheat grain yield across environments.

    Seeding Rate and Nitrogen Management Effects on Spring Wheat Yield and Yield Components · 2007

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Lower seeding rates reduced grain yield by 0.8 Mg ha −1.

    Seeding Rate and Genotype Effect on Agronomic Performance and End‐Use Quality of Winter Wheat · 2002

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Increasing sowing density from 50 to 100 kg/ha had little influence on yield or yield-related characteristics of restricted and freely tillering lines.

    Agronomic evaluation of a tiller inhibition gene (tin) in wheat. I. Effect on yield, yield components, and grain protein · 2005

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Increasing seeding rate at wide spacing could not achieve the narrow spacing yield gain.

    Hard Red Spring Wheat Response to Row Spacing, Seeding Rate, and Nitrogen · 2008

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Lower seeding rates decreased wheat grain yield by 0.8 Mg ha−1.

    Seeding Rate and Genotype Effect on Agronomic Performance and End-Use Quality of Winter Wheat · 2002

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    Wheat at 240 mm spacing yielded less than at 120 mm.

    Effects of inter‐row hoeing and fertilizer placement on weed growth and yield of winter wheat · 2003 · compared with 120 mm

    Opposite direction

489 papers more in this group

See all 498 papers →

tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

1,414 papers: 1,116 positive, 298 negative or no effect

1,115 papers in the same direction as this claim · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    No N application at tillering stage decreased spikes number per m2 and seeds per spike.

    Wheat yield and grain protein response to nitrogen amount and timing. · 2011

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Grain yield under stress during tillering and jointing was 27% lower than under the nonstressed treatment I‐1.

    Winter Wheat Response to Nitrogen and Irrigation · 1988 · compared with nonstressed (I‐1)

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    NT likely decreased wheat yield.

    The impacts of conservation agriculture on crop yield in China depend on specific practices, crops and cropping regions · 2014

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Tillage treatments had no residual effect on subsequent sunflower and wheat yields.

    Tillage and Residue Effects on Wheat, Sorghum, and Sunflower Grown in Rotation · 1984

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Tillage system had no significant wheat yield effect from 1977 to 2016.

    Long-term effects of crop succession, soil tillage and climate on wheat yield and soil properties · 2019

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Wheat grain yield was unaffected by tillage and cover crop management.

    Crop and cattle responses to tillage systems for integrated crop–livestock production in the Southern Piedmont, USA · 2007

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Reduced tillage decreased wheat yield by 14%.

    Tillage effects on weed communities in an organic winter wheat–sunflower–spelt cropping sequence · 2011

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    RB had no significant effect on wheat yield.

    Yield and water productivity of maize and wheat under deficit and raised bed irrigation practices in Egypt · 2012

    Opposite direction

1,405 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 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.