Abstract
Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006 for three plant populations (62,800, 70,700 or 79,100 plants /acre) under conventional, strip and no tillage systems for irrigation capacities limited to 25 mm every 4, 6 or 8 days. Corn yield increased approximately 12% from the lowest to highest irrigation capacity in these three years of varying precipitation and near normal crop evapotranspiration. Strip tillage and no tillage had 8.8% and 7% higher grain yields than conventional tillage, respectively. Results suggest that strip tillage obtains the residue benefits of no tillage in reducing evaporation losses without the yield penalty sometimes occurring with high residue. The small increases in total seasonal water use (< 20 mm) for strip tillage and no-tillage compared to conventional tillage can probably be explained by the higher grain yields for these 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
Corn yield increased by about 12% from the lowest to the highest irrigation capacity.
- Taxon
- Corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse1 - Treatment
- highest irrigation capacitye1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- approximately 12%e1
- Comparator
- loweste1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006”
e1“Corn yield increased approximately 12% from the lowest to highest irrigation capacity”
Claim · model-written summary
Strip tillage had 8.8% higher grain yield than conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- Strip tillagee2
- Outcome
- grain yieldse2
- Direction
- highere2
- Value
- 8.8%e2
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006”
e2“Strip tillage and no tillage had 8.8% and 7% higher grain yields than conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
No tillage had 7% higher grain yield than conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- no tillagee2
- Outcome
- grain yieldse2
- Direction
- highere2
- Value
- 7%e2
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006”
e2“Strip tillage and no tillage had 8.8% and 7% higher grain yields than conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Strip tillage was suggested to keep the residue benefits of no tillage in reducing evaporation losses without a yield penalty.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- strip tillage obtains the residue benefitse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006”
e3“Results suggest that strip tillage obtains the residue benefits of no tillage in reducing evaporation losses without the yield penalty”
Claim · model-written summary
Total seasonal water use increased slightly (< 20 mm) under strip tillage compared with conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- strip tillagee4
- Outcome
- total seasonal water usee4
- Direction
- increasese4
- Value
- < 20 mme4
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006”
e4“The small increases in total seasonal water use (< 20 mm) for strip tillage and no-tillage compared to conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Total seasonal water use increased slightly under no-tillage compared with conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- no-tillagee4
- Outcome
- total seasonal water usee4
- Direction
- increasese4
- Value
- < 20 mme4
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006”
e4“The small increases in total seasonal water use (< 20 mm) for strip tillage and no-tillage compared to conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
The small water-use increases under strip and no tillage can probably be explained by their higher grain yields.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- total seasonal water usee4
- Qualifier
- can probably be explained by the higher grain yieldse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn production was compared from 2004 to 2006”
e4“The small increases in total seasonal water use (< 20 mm) for strip tillage and no-tillage compared to conventional tillage can probably be explained by the higher grain yields for these tillage systems”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
790 papers in the same direction as this paper · 209 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 papers →tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
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.