Paper · 1979 · Agronomy Journal

Tillage Effects on Biomass Production and Moisture Utilization by Soybeans on Coastal Plain Soils1

E. J. Kamprath; D. K. Cassel; H. D. Gross; et al.

6
claims
6
verbatim quotes
34
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Many coarse‐textured surface soils in the southeastern Coastal Plain are prone to develop tillage pans which restrict root proliferation and moisture utilization in subsoils. The effect of tillage treatments on soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.] growth and soil moisture utilization was investigated on Norfolk sandy loam (Typic Paleudult) and Wagram loamy sand (Arenic Paleudult) soils. The three tillage treatments used were: conventional moldboard plowing and disking only before planting; or plowing and asking, followed by either chisel‐plowing; or subsoiling with bedding before planting. Measurements were made of top and root dry weight, leaf area, grain yield, soil water content and soil moisture tension. Breaking the tillage pan by chisel‐plowing or subsoiling increased top growth and leaf area of soybeans at full bloom. The percentage of roots below 30 cm was increased by subsoiling and chisel‐plowing when rainfall was below normal during the growth period. A higher proportion of roots was in the top 10 cm of soil with conventional tillage than with chisel‐plowing or subsoiling. Chisel‐plowing and subsoiling increased the amount of soil moisture utilized below a depth of 30 cm. Grain yields were increased by chisel‐plowing or subsoiling in those years when rainfall was below normal during lateflowering and the beginning of pod development. Subsoiling or chisel‐plowing of soils with compacted pans will increase soybean yields during years in which below‐average precipitation occurs during late‐flowering and the beginning of pod set. Yield increases are attributed to increased root proliferation below the pan and greater utilization of subsoil moisture.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chisel-plowing or subsoiling increased soybean top growth and leaf area at full bloom.

Taxon
soybeansGlycine maxe0
Organ / stage
full bloome0
Treatment
chisel‐plowing or subsoilinge0
Outcome
top growth and leaf areae0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Breaking the tillage pan by chisel‐plowing or subsoiling increased top growth and leaf area of soybeans at full bloom.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 724–842 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Subsoiling and chisel-plowing increased the percentage of roots below 30 cm under below-normal rainfall.

Treatment
subsoiling and chisel‐plowinge0
Outcome
percentage of roots below 30 cme0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
rainfall was below normal during the growth periode0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The percentage of roots below 30 cm was increased by subsoiling and chisel‐plowing when rainfall was below normal during the growth period.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 843–982 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage had a higher proportion of roots in the top 10 cm than chisel-plowing or subsoiling.

Organ / stage
rootse0
Treatment
conventional tillagee0
Outcome
proportion of rootse0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
top 10 cm of soile0
Comparator
chisel‐plowing or subsoilinge0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“A higher proportion of roots was in the top 10 cm of soil with conventional tillage than with chisel‐plowing or subsoiling.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 983–1106 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chisel-plowing and subsoiling increased soil moisture utilization below 30 cm.

Treatment
Chisel‐plowing and subsoilinge0
Outcome
amount of soil moisture utilized below a depth of 30 cme0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Chisel‐plowing and subsoiling increased the amount of soil moisture utilized below a depth of 30 cm.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1107–1207 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chisel-plowing or subsoiling increased grain yield in years of below-normal rainfall during late flowering and early pod development.

Treatment
chisel‐plowing or subsoilinge0
Outcome
Grain yieldse0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
rainfall was below normal during lateflowering and the beginning of pod developmente0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Grain yields were increased by chisel‐plowing or subsoiling in those years when rainfall was below normal during lateflowering and the beginning of pod development.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1208–1372 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors attribute yield increases to root proliferation below the pan and greater subsoil moisture use.

Outcome
Yield increasese0
Qualifier
increased root proliferation below the pan and greater utilization of subsoil moisturee0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Yield increases are attributed to increased root proliferation below the pan and greater utilization of subsoil moisture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1569–1690 · show in text ↑

tillage · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ

84 papers: 52 positive, 32 negative or no effect

51 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

80 papers more in this group

See all 84 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.