Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Other yield components showed no significant difference among tillage methods.

A claim from Effect of Different Tillage Methods on Yield and Yield Components of Forage Corn · 2013

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Other yield components showed no significant difference among tillage methods.

Taxon
forage cornt0
Treatment
tillage methodst0
Outcome
other yield componentse0
Direction
no significant differencee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“there was no significant difference in other yield components such as number”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 577–653
t0

“Effect of Different Tillage Methods on Yield and Yield Components of Forage Corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–80

Title

Effect of Different Tillage Methods on Yield and Yield Components of Forage Corn

Fereydoun Keshavarzpour http://www.idosi.org/ajps/6(1)13/6.pdf 2013

Other claims from this paper (3)

Record rev-e513cdfda6074ca684a41dd9550ff37bf918f1b92b5c003d78afba50d867d0f8 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

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

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

286 papers in the same direction as this claim · 812 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
    Deep tillage produced taller plants and more grains per cob and improved 1000-grain weight.

    Effects of different tillage and fertilizer treatments on growth and yield components of maize · 2012 · compared with conventional tillage

    Opposite directionCites this paper

  2. positive
    Conventional and reduced tillage gave significantly greater dry matter yield of forage corn than minimum tillage (14.6 t ha-1).

    Forage corn yield and physiological indices under different plant densities and tillage systems · 2012 · compared with MT

    Opposite directionCites this paper

  3. positive
    No-tillage was associated with higher corn yields.

    Influence of No‐tillage on Soil Moisture1 · 1971

    Opposite direction

  4. positive
    CA improved maize grain yield, especially in two- or three-year rotations.

    ROTATION IN CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE SYSTEMS OF ZAMBIA: EFFECTS ON SOIL QUALITY AND WATER RELATIONS · 2010

    Opposite direction

  5. positive
    Subsoil tillage increased grain yield of spring maize by 12.8% on average compared with conventional soil treatment.

    Effect of subsoil tillage depth on nutrient accumulation, root distribution, and grain yield in spring maize · 2014 · compared with conventional soil treatment

    Opposite direction

  6. positive
    In 1983 strip or no tillage with soybean rotation raised corn grain yield by 12%.

    Influence of Tillage and Crop Rotation on Yields of Corn, Soybean, and Wheat · 1988

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    In Lemu, CA monocrop maize yielded 2.7 Mg ha −1 more than conventional tillage in 2009/10.

    Conservation agriculture systems for Malawian smallholder farmers: long-term effects on crop productivity, profitability and soil quality · 2012 · compared with conventional tillage

    Opposite direction

  8. positive
    Tillage increased corn yields.

    Long-term crop rotation and tillage effects on soil greenhouse gas emissions and crop production in Illinois, USA · 2018 · compared with no-tillage

    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.