Abstract
A 2-yr field experiment was conducted on a calcareous alluvial soil with four summer maize intercropping systems at Shangzhuang Experiment Station (116.3°E, 39.9°N) in the North China Plain. The objective was to determine nitrate leaching from intercropping systems involving maize (Zea mays L.): sole maize (CK), maize + soybean (CST), maize + groundnut (CGT), maize + ryegrass (CHM), and maize + alfalfa (CMX). Intercropping greatly reduced nitrate accumulation in the 100-200 cm soil layers compared with maize monoculture. Nitrate accumulation under intercropping systems decreased significantly at the 140-200 cm soil depth; the accumulation varied in the order CK>CST>CMX>CHM>CGT. However, compared to the CK treatment, nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period were reduced by 20.9-174.8 (CGT), 35.2-130.8 (CHM), 60.4-122.0 (CMX), and 30.6-82.4 kg ha−1 (CST). The results also suggested that intercropping is an effective way to reduce nitrogen leaching in fields with N fertilizer over-dose.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping greatly reduced nitrate accumulation in the 100-200 cm soil layers compared with maize monoculture.
- Treatment
- Intercroppinge1
- Outcome
- nitrate accumulation in the 100-200 cm soil layerse1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Comparator
- maize monoculturee1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Intercropping greatly reduced nitrate accumulation in the 100-200 cm soil layers compared with maize monoculture”
e2“involving maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrate accumulation under intercropping systems decreased significantly at the 140-200 cm soil depth.
- Treatment
- intercropping systemse1
- Outcome
- Nitrate accumulatione1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Qualifier
- 140-200 cm soil depthe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Nitrate accumulation under intercropping systems decreased significantly at the 140-200 cm soil depth”
e2“involving maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrate accumulation varied in the order CK>CST>CMX>CHM>CGT among the systems.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Nitrate accumulation under intercropping systems decreased significantly at the 140-200 cm soil depth; the accumulation varied in the order CK>CST>CMX>CHM>CGT”
e2“involving maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize + groundnut (CGT) reduced nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period by 20.9-174.8 compared with the CK treatment.
- Treatment
- maize + groundnut (CGT)e2
- Outcome
- nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing periode1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 20.9-174.8e1
- Comparator
- CK treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“compared to the CK treatment, nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period were reduced by 20.9-174.8 (CGT), 35.2-130.8 (CHM), 60.4-122.0 (CMX), and 30.6-82.4 kg ha−1 (CST)”
e2“maize + groundnut (CGT)”
t0“Maize Intercropping Systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize + ryegrass (CHM) reduced nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period by 35.2-130.8 compared with the CK treatment.
- Treatment
- maize + ryegrass (CHM)e2
- Outcome
- nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing periode1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 35.2-130.8e1
- Comparator
- CK treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“compared to the CK treatment, nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period were reduced by 20.9-174.8 (CGT), 35.2-130.8 (CHM), 60.4-122.0 (CMX), and 30.6-82.4 kg ha−1 (CST)”
e2“maize + ryegrass (CHM)”
t0“Maize Intercropping Systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize + alfalfa (CMX) reduced nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period by 60.4-122.0 compared with the CK treatment.
- Treatment
- maize + alfalfa (CMX)e2
- Outcome
- nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing periode1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 60.4-122.0e1
- Comparator
- CK treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“compared to the CK treatment, nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period were reduced by 20.9-174.8 (CGT), 35.2-130.8 (CHM), 60.4-122.0 (CMX), and 30.6-82.4 kg ha−1 (CST)”
e2“maize + alfalfa (CMX)”
t0“Maize Intercropping Systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize + soybean (CST) reduced nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period by 30.6-82.4 kg ha−1 compared with the CK treatment.
- Treatment
- maize + soybean (CST)e2
- Outcome
- nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing periode1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 30.6-82.4 kg ha−1e1
- Comparator
- CK treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“compared to the CK treatment, nitrate leaching losses during the maize growing period were reduced by 20.9-174.8 (CGT), 35.2-130.8 (CHM), 60.4-122.0 (CMX), and 30.6-82.4 kg ha−1 (CST)”
e2“maize + soybean (CST)”
t0“Maize Intercropping Systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping is an effective way to reduce nitrogen leaching in fields with N fertilizer over-dose.
- Treatment
- intercroppinge1
- Outcome
- effective way to reduce nitrogen leaching in fields with N fertilizer over-dosee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“intercropping is an effective way to reduce nitrogen leaching in fields with N fertilizer over-dose”
t0“Maize Intercropping Systems”
The same questions in other papers
Medicago sativa · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
Arachis hypogaea · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →Glycine max · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →intercropping · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
121 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
137 papers more in this group
See all 141 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.