Abstract
Over a three year study, two reduced tillage systems used significantly less energy than conventional tillage. The Sundance system averaged 46% of the energy used by the conventional system, and the Uprooter-Shredder-Mulcher (USM) averaged 65% of the energy used by the conventional system. These energy savings translate directly into cost savings of about the same proportions. Additionally, the Sundance and USM systems can plow down and prepare the next seedbed in about one-half the time that conventional tillage requires. In three years of testing we have not detected any significant differences in soil compaction, and we have not measured any yield reductions from these reduced tillage systems.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
The Sundance reduced-tillage system averaged 46% of the energy used by conventional tillage in cotton, significantly less.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- Sundance systeme0
- Outcome
- energye0
- Direction
- less energye0
- Value
- 46%e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton Tillage Systems”
e0“two reduced tillage systems used significantly less energy than conventional tillage. The Sundance system averaged 46% of the energy used by the conventional system”
Claim · model-written summary
The Uprooter-Shredder-Mulcher (USM) reduced-tillage system averaged 65% of the energy used by conventional tillage in cotton, significantly less.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Uprooter-Shredder-Mulcher (USM)e0
- Outcome
- energye0
- Direction
- less energye0
- Value
- 65%e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton Tillage Systems”
e0“two reduced tillage systems used significantly less energy than conventional tillage. The Sundance system averaged 46% of the energy used by the conventional system, and the Uprooter-Shredder-Mulcher (USM) averaged 65% of the energy used by the conventional system”
Claim · model-written summary
The Sundance system can plow down and prepare the next seedbed in about one-half the time conventional tillage requires.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Sundancee0
- Outcome
- plow down and prepare the next seedbede0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- one-half the timee0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton Tillage Systems”
e0“the Sundance and USM systems can plow down and prepare the next seedbed in about one-half the time that conventional tillage requires”
Claim · model-written summary
The USM system can plow down and prepare the next seedbed in about one-half the time conventional tillage requires.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- USMe0
- Outcome
- plow down and prepare the next seedbede0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- one-half the timee0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton Tillage Systems”
e0“the Sundance and USM systems can plow down and prepare the next seedbed in about one-half the time that conventional tillage requires”
Claim · model-written summary
The energy savings of the reduced tillage systems translate directly into cost savings of about the same proportions.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- cost savingse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton Tillage Systems”
e0“These energy savings translate directly into cost savings of about the same proportions”
Claim · model-written summary
No significant differences in soil compaction were detected over three years of testing of the reduced tillage systems.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- reduced tillage systemse0
- Outcome
- soil compactione0
- Direction
- not detected any significant differencese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton Tillage Systems”
e0“In three years of testing we have not detected any significant differences in soil compaction, and we have not measured any yield reductions from these reduced tillage systems”
Claim · model-written summary
No yield reductions were measured from the reduced tillage systems in cotton over three years.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- reduced tillage systemse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparatorSetting
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cotton Tillage Systems”
e0“In three years of testing we have not detected any significant differences in soil compaction, and we have not measured any yield reductions from these reduced tillage systems”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · soil: physics · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →tillage · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 113 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
155 papers more in this group
See all 159 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.