Abstract
No-tillage (NT) practice for corn production has advantages of reduction of soil erosion and energy conservation. Research on effects of NT for sweet corn or super sweet corn is very limited. Hybrids of sugary (su) and shrunken-2 (sh2) were tested under NT and conventional tillage (CT) practices to investigate plant characters, ear characters, fresh yield, and grain yield. Sugary hybrids were Golden Cross Bantam 70 (GCB70), Sprint, Geumdanok, and Danok3. Shrunken-2 hybrids were BSS9472, Cambella90, GSS9299, Jubilee, KS-Y-65, and Chodangok1. Emergence rates under NT were lower than those under CT for su, while there was no difference between tillage systems for sh2. There were no differences between CT and NT for days to tasseling and silking, plant height, and ear height for both su and sh2. Ear characters such as ear length, number of kernel rows, number of kernels per row, and t100-kernel weight under NT were not significantly different from those under CT. There were no differences between two tillage practice for fresh and grain yield, rather they showed trend of increases under NT practices. Results from this trial indicate that NT practice for both su and sh2 cultivation may be possible to recommend to farmers.
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
No-tillage lowered emergence rates of sugary corn hybrids relative to conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayst0 - Material
- sue0
- Treatment
- NTe0
- Outcome
- Emergence ratese0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- CTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Corn Hybrids”
e0“Emergence rates under NT were lower than those under CT for su, while there was no difference between tillage systems for sh2”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage and conventional tillage did not differ in emergence rate of shrunken-2 corn hybrids.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Material
- sh2e0
- Treatment
- NTe0
- Outcome
- Emergence ratese0
- Direction
- no differencee0
- Comparator
- CTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Corn Hybrids”
e0“Emergence rates under NT were lower than those under CT for su, while there was no difference between tillage systems for sh2”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage and conventional tillage did not differ in days to tasseling and silking, plant height or ear height in sugary and shrunken-2 corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Material
- su and sh2e1
- Treatment
- NTe1
- Outcome
- days to tasseling and silking, plant height, and ear heighte1
- Direction
- no differencese1
- Comparator
- CTe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Corn Hybrids”
e1“There were no differences between CT and NT for days to tasseling and silking, plant height, and ear height for both su and sh2”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage and conventional tillage did not significantly differ in ear length, kernel rows or kernels per row.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Organ / stage
- Eare2
- Treatment
- NTe2
- Outcome
- ear length, number of kernel rows, number of kernels per rowe2
- Direction
- not significantly differente2
- Comparator
- CTe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Corn Hybrids”
e2“Ear characters such as ear length, number of kernel rows, number of kernels per row, and t100-kernel weight under NT were not significantly different from those under CT”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage and conventional tillage did not significantly differ in t100-kernel weight.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Organ / stage
- Eare2
- Treatment
- NTe2
- Outcome
- t100-kernel weighte2
- Direction
- not significantly differente2
- Comparator
- CTe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Corn Hybrids”
e2“Ear characters such as ear length, number of kernel rows, number of kernels per row, and t100-kernel weight under NT were not significantly different from those under CT”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage and the other tillage practice did not differ in fresh and grain yield, with a trend toward increases under no-tillage.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- NT practicese3
- Outcome
- fresh and grain yielde3
- Direction
- no differencese3
- Qualifier
- trend of increases under NT practicese3
- Comparator
- two tillage practicee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Corn Hybrids”
e3“There were no differences between two tillage practice for fresh and grain yield, rather they showed trend of increases under NT practices”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage practice for sugary and shrunken-2 corn cultivation may be recommended to farmers.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Outcome
- NT practice for both su and sh2 cultivatione4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Corn Hybrids”
e4“NT practice for both su and sh2 cultivation may be possible to recommend to farmers”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
86 papers in the same direction as this paper · 196 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 papers →tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
286 papers in the same direction as this paper · 812 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,095 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.