Abstract
Cover crops in direct seeding mulch‐based cropping (DMC) systems can be an effective tool to optimize N management for crop production in the Brazilian cerrados. The objective of this study was to determine the effect of four cover crops on maize ( Zea mays L.) grain yields in two fields that had been under DMC for 3 and 14 yr. We hypothesized that cover crops would optimize N supply to the maize crop, thereby leading to increased yields. Cover crop treatments were: bare fallow (BF), pigeon pea (PP) [ Cajanus cajan (L.) Huth], pearl millet [ Pennisetum glaucum (L.) R. Br.]–Congo signal grass (PM‐CS) ( Brachiaria ruziziensis Germain & Evrard), pigeon pea–finger millet (PP‐FM) [ Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaertn.], and sorghum (S) [ Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. Experiments were conducted during the 2003–2004 and 2004–2005 growing seasons. In 2003–2004 on the DMC‐14 field, cover crops increased N uptake of zero‐N fertilized maize with 25 to 66 kg N ha −1 compared to BF, which resulted in an increase in grain yield of 0.4 to 2.4 Mg ha −1 . Effects on fertilized maize were much less. The highest yield benefits were obtained with pigeon pea and sorghum as sole cover crop. No significant cover crop effects were recorded in 2004–2005. Nitrogen losses under maize estimated on the basis of a simple soil mineral nitrogen balance ranged from 40 to 90 kg N ha −1 in 2003–2004, while they were smaller in 2004–2005 (10–25 kg N ha −1 ), presumably due to the lower rainfall. Cover crops can have an immediate positive effect on maize productivity under DMC in the cerrados, provided that they are sown immediately after harvest of the main crop.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crops increased N uptake of zero-N maize by 25 to 66 kg N ha −1 versus bare fallow in the 2003–2004 DMC-14 field.
- Treatment
- cover cropse0
- Outcome
- N uptakee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 25 to 66 kg N ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- zero‐N fertilizede0
- Comparator
- BFe0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2003–2004 on the DMC‐14 field, cover crops increased N uptake of zero‐N fertilized maize with 25 to 66 kg N ha −1 compared to BF”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crops increased zero-N maize grain yield by 0.4 to 2.4 Mg ha −1 versus bare fallow.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“which resulted in an increase in grain yield of 0.4 to 2.4 Mg ha −1”
t0“Cover Crop and Nitrogen Effects on Maize Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Effects of cover crops were much less on fertilized maize.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effects on fertilized maize were much less”
t0“Cover Crop and Nitrogen Effects on Maize Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Pigeon pea as sole cover crop gave one of the highest yield benefits.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest yield benefits were obtained with pigeon pea and sorghum as sole cover crop”
t0“Maize Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Sorghum as sole cover crop gave one of the highest yield benefits.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest yield benefits were obtained with pigeon pea and sorghum as sole cover crop”
t0“Maize Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
No significant cover-crop effect was detected in 2004–2005.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant cover crop effects were recorded in 2004–2005”
t0“Maize Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Estimated nitrogen loss under maize was 40 to 90 kg N ha −1 in 2003–2004.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nitrogen losses under maize estimated on the basis of a simple soil mineral nitrogen balance ranged from 40 to 90 kg N ha −1 in 2003–2004”
Claim · model-written summary
Estimated nitrogen loss under maize was 10–25 kg N ha −1 in 2004–2005.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nitrogen losses under maize estimated on the basis of a simple soil mineral nitrogen balance ranged from 40 to 90 kg N ha −1 in 2003–2004, while they were smaller in 2004–2005 (10–25 kg N ha −1 )”
t0“Maize Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend sowing cover crops immediately after harvest to boost maize productivity.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cover crops can have an immediate positive effect on maize productivity under DMC in the cerrados, provided that they are sown immediately after harvest of the main crop”
The same questions in other papers
cover crop · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →cover crop · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
103 papers in the same direction as this paper · 104 in the opposite direction · 14 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
218 papers more in this group
See all 222 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.