Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings gave 31% higher maize yield than control.

A claim from Hedgerow Pruning Management Effects on Maize Yield and Nitrogen Uptake in an Alley Cropping System in Haiti · 2004

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings gave 31% higher maize yield than control.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings per seasone0
Outcome
maize yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
31%e0
Comparator
controle0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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

“Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings per season averaged 31% higher maize yield and 48% higher N uptake than control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1369–1503

Title

Hedgerow Pruning Management Effects on Maize Yield and Nitrogen Uptake in an Alley Cropping System in Haiti

Lionel Isaac; Dennis A. Shannon; C. Wesley Wood Agronomy Journal 2004. doi:10.2134/agronj2004.1632

Other claims from this paper (13)

Record rev-e1725bc7f66d8d41e84e02631b8a4d4d1a0699ac9c5b09d4a7d5ebf92bc02853 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 11 in the model’s answer

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

174 papers: 86 positive, 88 negative or no effect

85 papers in the same direction as this claim · 86 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
    Pruning increased maize grain and stover yields compared with no-pruning plots.

    Hedgerow Pruning Effects on Light Interception, Water Relations and Yield in Alley-Cropped Maize · 2008 · compared with no-pruning plots

    Same directionCites this paper

  2. negative
    Defoliated plants showed compensatory reductions in kernels per ear.

    Effect of Altered Source‐Sink Ratio on Growth of Maize Kernels1 · 1983

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Complete defoliation reduced maize yield by 6.4 to 82%, more than partial defoliation.

    Dry Matter Accumulation in Maize in Response to Defoliation1 · 1976 · compared with partial defoliation

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Calculated milk yield of the leafy hybrid showed no change as cutting height increased from 15 to 46 cm.

    Hybrid, Maturity, and Cutting Height Interactions on Corn Forage Yield and Quality · 2004 · compared with 15

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Detasseling did not affect grain yield.

    Effect of detasseling on baby corn, green ear and grain yield of two maize hybrids · 2010

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Complete V7 defoliation did not reduce yield in most comparisons.

    Corn Yield Components and Yield Responses to Defoliation at Different Row Widths · 2017

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Defoliation reduced grain yield equally in all selection cycles.

    Defoliation and Plant Density Effects on Maize Selected for Reduced Plant Height · 1993

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    Corn forage yield decreased as leaf removal severity increased.

    Impact of Defoliation on Corn Forage Yield · 2004

    Opposite direction

165 papers more in this group

See all 174 papers →

climate site · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

180 papers: 102 positive, 78 negative or no effect

101 papers in the same direction as this claim · 73 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    Projected 2050s temperature and precipitation changes lead to a global yield reduction if planting and harvesting dates stay unchanged.

    Simulating the effects of climate and agricultural management practices on global crop yield · 2011

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Under the Canadian model scenario, climate change reduced grain yield by 30 to 40% in Kansas and Oklahoma rainfed areas with less precipitation.

    Effects of climate change on US crop production: simulation results using two different GCM scenarios. Part I: Wheat, potato, maize, and citrus · 2002

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Climate change negatively affected mean maize yield in the scenarios.

    Potential effects of changes in mean climate and climate variability on the yield of winter and spring crops in Switzerland · 2007 · compared with current

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Season-long waterhemp interference reduced corn yield 74% in two years.

    Common waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis) interference in corn · 2004

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Under the 2xCO2 GCM and RCM scenarios, yield and biomass showed no significant change between scenarios of the same model.

    Assessment of Climate Change and Agriculture in Spain Using Climate Models · 2001 · compared with scenarios of the same model

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Landing pad insertion had no effect on grain yield.

    Complex Trait Loci in Maize Enabled by CRISPR-Cas9 Mediated Gene Insertion · 2020

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Climate trends for 1981-2009 reduced maize yield by 15-30%.

    Contributions of cultivar shift, management practice and climate change to maize yield in North China Plain in 1981–2009 · 2015

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    Season-long weed competition reduced corn yields by more than 90% at each location.

    Effect of Weed Removal Timing and Row Spacing on Soil Moisture in Corn (Zea mays) · 2006

    Opposite direction

171 papers more in this group

See all 180 papers →

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

629 papers: 575 positive, 54 negative or no effect

574 papers in the same direction as this claim · 42 in the opposite direction · 12 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
    Foliar fungicides did not significantly improve yield in damaged or nondamaged plots.

    Effect of Foliar Fungicides on Corn with Simulated Hail Damage · 2009 · compared with nontreated controls

    Opposite direction

  2. no effect
    More than three spray applications generally gave no further yield gain.

    Maize Yield Response to Chemical Control of Spodoptera frugiperda at Different Plant Growth Stages in South Africa · 2021

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Foliar fertilizer applied from 2 weeks after silking reduced corn grain yield by 6.4% in 1977.

    Corn Grain Yield and Nutrient Response to Foliar Fertilizer Applied during Grain Fill1 · 1982

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Corn yield reduction was 1.5 times greater with proportional volume at the 12.5% rate.

    Effect of Carrier Volume on Corn (Zea mays) and Soybean (Glycine max) Response to Simulated Drift of Glyphosate and Glufosinate1 · 2002 · compared with constant spray volume

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Nano-N plus nano-Zn with 75% conventional N gave wheat and maize grain yield at par with full conventional fertilizer.

    Changes in microbial community structure and yield responses with the use of nano-fertilizers of nitrogen and zinc in wheat–maize system · 2024 · compared with N 100 PK

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Offset corn had lower nitrogen concentration and yield.

    Corn Production Associated with Liquid Beef Manure Application Methods · 1991 · compared with corn planted over the zone

    Opposite direction

  7. no effect
    Foliar cocktail caused no grain yield trade-off.

    Biofortification of different maize cultivars with zinc, iron and selenium by foliar fertilizer applications · 2023

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Grain yield and N content, and the accumulation of dry weight and reduced N by the whole plant, were unaffected by the spray treatments in 1981.

    Foliar Applications of Nutrients on Maize. I. Yield and N Content of Grain and Stover1 · 1984

    Opposite direction

620 papers more in this group

See all 629 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.