Abstract

Two studies evaluated the impact of residue removal; study 1, grazed in the fall or spring, study 2, removed by grazing at two stocking rates, light (LG), heavy (HG), or baled(B). There were no differences in pre-grazing treatments for digestibility, CP, NDF, plant fraction as a percent of residue and kg/25.5 kg of grain. Digestibility was highest in husk and lowest in stem. CP was greatest in leaf blade and lowest in husk. NDF was highest in the leaf sheath and lowest in the cob while stem is the greatest percentage of the plant and husk the smallest. The fractions cattle consumed yielded 6-7 kg of residue per 25.5 kg of grain. LG cattle had greater BCS (P < 0.01) and BW (P = 0.03) post-grazing. Soybean yields were greater following corn residue grazing (P ≤ 0.01) in both fall and spring grazed treatments compared to un-grazed. Study two found no effect of residue removal on grain yield (P = 0.31). An additional study evaluated the effect of plant density and maturity, moderately early maturing (MEM) hybrids or moderately late maturing (MLM) hybrids. All fractions had greater kg of DM/ha in MLM hybrids. Percent of husk and leaf blade were higher in MLM hybrids. Leaf blade and stem were only fractions with greater NDF in MLM hybrids. NDFD of stem and husk were only fractions greater in MLM hybrids. MEM hybrids had greater CP in leaf sheath and stem only. As plant densities increased kg DM/ha increased for all fractions but cob. Percentage of cob and husk in total residue decreased with increased plant densities. The kg of leaf blade/25.5 kg of grain was only fraction to increase with the increasing densities. CP decreased for all plant fractions as planting density increased. NDF increased for all fractions as planting density increased. NDFD only decreased for leaf sheath as planting density increased. Advisors: L. Aaron Stalker, Terry J. Klopfenstein

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 19

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-grazing residue treatments did not differ in digestibility, CP, NDF, fraction percentage or residue per grain.

Treatment
pre-grazing treatmentse0
Outcome
digestibility, CP, NDFe0
Direction
no differencese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“There were no differences in pre-grazing treatments for digestibility, CP, NDF, plant fraction as a percent of residue and kg/25.5 kg of grain.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 180–323 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Digestibility was highest in husk and lowest in stem.

Organ / stage
huske0
Outcome
Digestibilitye0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
steme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Digestibility was highest in husk and lowest in stem.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 324–377 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

CP was greatest in leaf blade and lowest in husk.

Organ / stage
leaf bladee0
Outcome
CPe0
Direction
greateste0
Comparator
huske0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“CP was greatest in leaf blade and lowest in husk.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 378–427 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NDF was highest in leaf sheath and lowest in cob.

Organ / stage
leaf sheathe0
Outcome
NDFe0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
cobe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NDF was highest in the leaf sheath and lowest in the cob”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 428–484 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stem was the greatest plant fraction and husk the smallest.

Organ / stage
steme0
Outcome
percentage of the plante0
Direction
greateste0
Comparator
huske0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“stem is the greatest percentage of the plant and husk the smallest.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 491–558 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cattle consumed corn fractions yielding 6-7 kg residue per 25.5 kg grain.

Outcome
residuee0
Value
6-7 kg of residue per 25.5 kg of graine0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The fractions cattle consumed yielded 6-7 kg of residue per 25.5 kg of grain.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 559–636 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soybean yields were greater after fall or spring corn residue grazing than after no grazing.

Taxon
SoybeanGlycine maxe0
Treatment
corn residue grazinge0
Outcome
Soybean yieldse0
Direction
greatere0
Qualifier
both fall and spring grazed treatmentse0
Comparator
un-grazede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Soybean yields were greater following corn residue grazing (P ≤ 0.01) in both fall and spring grazed treatments compared to un-grazed.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 706–840 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue removal had no detected effect on grain yield.

Treatment
residue removale0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Study two found no effect of residue removal on grain yield (P = 0.31).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 841–912 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All residue fractions had greater dry mass per hectare in MLM hybrids.

Material
MLM hybridse0
Outcome
kg of DM/hae0
Direction
greatere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“All fractions had greater kg of DM/ha in MLM hybrids.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1121 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Husk and leaf blade percentages were higher in MLM hybrids.

Material
MLM hybridse0
Outcome
Percent of husk and leaf bladee0
Direction
highere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Percent of husk and leaf blade were higher in MLM hybrids.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1122–1180 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf blade and stem NDF were greater in MLM hybrids.

Material
MLM hybridse0
Organ / stage
Leaf blade and steme0
Outcome
NDFe0
Direction
greatere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Leaf blade and stem were only fractions with greater NDF in MLM hybrids.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1253 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Stem and husk NDFD were greater in MLM hybrids.

Material
MLM hybridse0
Organ / stage
stem and huske0
Outcome
NDFDe0
Direction
greatere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NDFD of stem and husk were only fractions greater in MLM hybrids.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1254–1319 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf sheath and stem CP were greater in MEM hybrids.

Material
MEM hybridse0
Organ / stage
leaf sheath and steme0
Outcome
CPe0
Direction
greatere0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“MEM hybrids had greater CP in leaf sheath and stem only.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1320–1376 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Higher planting density increased dry residue mass for all fractions except cob.

Treatment
plant densitiese0
Outcome
kg DM/hae0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
all fractions but cobe0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“As plant densities increased kg DM/ha increased for all fractions but cob.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1377–1451 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cob and husk percentages decreased at higher planting density.

Treatment
increased plant densitiese0
Outcome
Percentage of cob and husk in total residuee0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Percentage of cob and husk in total residue decreased with increased plant densities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1452–1537 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf blade mass per grain increased at higher density.

Treatment
increasing densitiese0
Outcome
kg of leaf blade/25.5 kg of graine0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The kg of leaf blade/25.5 kg of grain was only fraction to increase with the increasing densities.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1538–1636 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

CP declined in all plant fractions at higher planting density.

Treatment
planting densitye0
Outcome
CPe0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“CP decreased for all plant fractions as planting density increased.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1637–1704 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NDF rose in all fractions at higher planting density.

Treatment
planting densitye0
Outcome
NDFe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NDF increased for all fractions as planting density increased.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1705–1767 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NDFD declined only in leaf sheath at higher density.

Organ / stage
leaf sheathe0
Treatment
planting densitye0
Outcome
NDFDe0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NDFD only decreased for leaf sheath as planting density increased.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1768–1834 · show in text ↑
t0

“Effect of Residue Removal on Subsequent Year Quality and Quantity of Corn Residue and Cattle Performance While Grazing Corn Residue at Different Stocking Rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–159 · show in text ↑

Zea mays subsp. mays · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ

70 papers: 48 positive, 22 negative or no effect

47 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

66 papers more in this group

See all 70 papers →

grazing · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ

22 papers: 8 positive, 14 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

18 papers more in this group

See all 22 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.