Abstract
Abstract Double‐cropping systems involving feed grains are becoming increasingly important for the long growing season in the Southeast and to meet consumer demands for food. Therefore, corn ( Zea mays L.) forage production and quality were evaluated in double‐cropping systems following wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) and barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.). These systems were evaluated at two locations in Georgia Upper Coastal Plain (soil is member of the clayey, kaolinitic, thermic family of Typic Hapludults) regions. Variables in this study were no‐till (NT) vs. conventional tillage (CT), irrigated vs. non‐irrigated, and early vs. late planting date. Forage yields from corn NT planted in small grain stubble (harvested for silage) in April were about equal to those from CT‐planted corn. Corn forage yields when NT was planted in small grain stubble in mid‐June were reduced compared with that planted in April in the Coastal Plain Region of Georgia, while forage yields in the Piedmont Region were nearly equal for corn planted early and late. The lower yields of late planted corn were related to a lower percentage of ears in the forage than early planted corn. Forage yield increases due to irrigation varied from zero to over 100%, depending on season and location. A high forage yield potential for double cropped NT corn planted early (mid‐April) throughout the Southeastern USA is evidenced. With present varieties and known management, forage yields of late planted (June corn) will usually be lower than those for early corn in the Coastal Plain region.
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
April no-till corn forage yields were about equal to conventional tillage yields.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- NT planted in small grain stubblee0
- Outcome
- Forage yieldse0
- Direction
- about equale0
- Comparator
- CT‐planted corne0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Forage yields from corn NT planted in small grain stubble (harvested for silage) in April were about equal to those from CT‐planted corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Mid-June no-till corn forage yield was reduced relative to April planting in the Coastal Plain.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- NT was planted in small grain stubble in mid‐Junee0
- Outcome
- forage yieldse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- planted in Aprile0
- Setting
- Coastal Plain Region of Georgiae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn forage yields when NT was planted in small grain stubble in mid‐June were reduced compared with that planted in April in the Coastal Plain Region of Georgia”
Claim · model-written summary
Early and late planted corn forage yields were nearly equal in the Piedmont.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- planted earlye0
- Outcome
- forage yieldse0
- Direction
- nearly equale0
- Comparator
- latee0
- Setting
- Piedmont Regione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“forage yields in the Piedmont Region were nearly equal for corn planted early and late”
Claim · model-written summary
Late planted corn had a lower percentage of ears in forage than early planted corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- percentage of ears in the foragee0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- early planted corne0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lower yields of late planted corn were related to a lower percentage of ears in the forage than early planted corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation raised forage yield by zero to over 100% depending on season and location.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Forage yielde0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- zero to over 100%e0
- Qualifier
- depending on season and locatione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Forage yield increases due to irrigation varied from zero to over 100%, depending on season and location”
t0“Corn Forage Production in No‐Till and Conventional Tillage Double‐Cropping Systems1”
Claim · model-written summary
Early double cropped no-till corn showed high forage yield potential across the Southeastern USA.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- high forage yield potentiale0
- Setting
- Southeastern USAe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A high forage yield potential for double cropped NT corn planted early (mid‐April) throughout the Southeastern USA is evidenced”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors expect late June corn yields usually to be lower than early corn in the Coastal Plain.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- late planted (June corn)e0
- Setting
- Coastal Plain regione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“forage yields of late planted (June corn) will usually be lower than those for early corn in the Coastal Plain region”
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
286 papers in the same direction as this paper · 812 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.