Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Annual economic benefit under STF was 42,254.54 CNY ha−1 in the second year, 2.29–9.87% above other treatments.

A claim from Optimizing Tillage and Fertilization Patterns to Improve Soil Physical Properties, NUE and Economic Benefits of Wheat-Maize Crop Rotation Systems · 2022

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Annual economic benefit under STF was 42,254.54 CNY ha−1 in the second year, 2.29–9.87% above other treatments.

Taxon
Winter wheat and summer maizeTriticum aestivumZea mayse1
Treatment
STF treatmente2
Outcome
annual economic benefitse0
Direction
highere0
Value
42,254.54 CNY ha−1e0
Qualifier
2.29–9.87%e0
Comparator
other treatmentse0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSetting

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 ↗
Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The annual economic benefits under this treatment were 42,182.26 and 42,254.54 CNY ha−1, which were 1.02–12.94% and 2.29–9.87% higher than those of the other treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1502–1671
e1

“Winter wheat and summer maize rotation is the main cropping pattern in the North China Plain (NCP).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–99
e2

“The total yield of wheat–maize rotation for both years was the highest under STF treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1410–1501

Title

Optimizing Tillage and Fertilization Patterns to Improve Soil Physical Properties, NUE and Economic Benefits of Wheat-Maize Crop Rotation Systems

Daijing Zhang; Xinru Hao; Zhiyao Fan; et al. Agriculture 2022. doi:10.3390/agriculture12081264

Other claims from this paper (11)

Record rev-fa0556f3adfbb0325eae7f80075112de5a34405e57e1616ad839d95b2155dd9e · schema claims-v0.9 · position 11 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 →

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
  2. negative
  3. negative
  4. no effect
  5. no effect
  6. no effect
  7. negative
  8. no effect

1,405 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 papers →

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

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

3,114 papers in the same direction as this claim · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. no effect
  7. no effect
  8. no effect

3,429 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 papers →

3 of 4 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.