Abstract
Abstract Water use and yield of wheat ( Triticum aestivum L. em. Thell, cultivar Bluebird 2) were compared under five irrigation treatments using wheat planted in a silty clay loam soil in December and harvested in May. Water was applied at five rates from 11% more to 23% less than evapotranspiration (ET) from a weighing lysimeter planted to the same crop. Equal quantities of water per irrigation were applied at 76 mm in the pre‐emergence and the first postemergence irrigations and 102 mm in later irrigations. For a 102‐mm application, an irrigation was scheduled whenever cumulative ET from the lysimeter reached 91, 102, 112, 122, and 132 mm of water, since the last scheduled irrigation for the treatments. Total amounts of 485 to 688 mm of water were applied in five to seven irrigations. Soil water content to 1.5 m decreased progressively with water applications below ET. The soil water content was determined gravimetrically before each irrigation and water use determined from differences in soil water content between irrigations plus the amount of applied water. Seasonal water use decreased progressively from 677 to 540 mm as irrigation frequency decreased, although water use in all treatments was similar for the first 120 days. Yields decreased as water applications decreased, except between the treatments equal to ET and at 10% below ET. At the three driest treatments yield decreased proportionately with water use, indicating that water use efficiency was not increased by restricting water use below ET from adequately watered wheat. A relationship between grain yield (Y) , in g/m 2 , and water use (X) , in mm water, was characterized by the expression: Y = −9548 + 46.42 X − 0.06866 X 2 + 0.00003390 X 3 ( r = 0.98). Seed weight was unaffected by irrigation treatment. Cumulative total dry weight was similar on all treatments for the first 120 days. Plants headed 7 to 10 days earlier and matured 5 or 6 days earlier on the driest treatment than on the wettest treatments. Earlier maturity could have accounted for most of the differences in water use and total dry matter between treatments, although water stress was also important in the driest treatment. Plants produced more heads on the drier than on the wetter treatments and were shorter on the driest treatment. Data on the salt balance of the soil profile were inconclusive. The significance of these data to irrigation scheduling is discussed.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Soil water content declined progressively when water application was below evapotranspiration.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- water applications below ETe0
- Outcome
- Soil water content to 1.5 me0
- Direction
- decreased progressivelye0
- Comparator
- ETe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil water content to 1.5 m decreased progressively with water applications below ET.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Seasonal wheat water use fell from 677 to 540 mm as irrigation frequency decreased.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation frequencye0
- Outcome
- Seasonal water usee0
- Direction
- decreased progressivelye0
- Value
- 677 to 540 mme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seasonal water use decreased progressively from 677 to 540 mm as irrigation frequency decreased”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Water use was similar among treatments during the first 120 days.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- all treatmentse0
- Outcome
- water usee0
- Direction
- similare0
- Qualifier
- first 120 dayse0
- Comparator
- all treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water use in all treatments was similar for the first 120 days”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yields declined as water applications decreased, except between ET-matched and 10% below ET treatments.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- water applications decreasede0
- Outcome
- Yieldse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Comparator
- treatments equal to ET and at 10% below ETe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yields decreased as water applications decreased, except between the treatments equal to ET and at 10% below ET.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
At the three driest treatments, yield fell in proportion to water use.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- three driest treatmentse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- decreased proportionatelye0
- Qualifier
- with water usee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At the three driest treatments yield decreased proportionately with water use”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Restricting water use below ET did not increase wheat water-use efficiency.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- restricting water use below ETe0
- Outcome
- water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- not increasede0
- Comparator
- adequately watered wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water use efficiency was not increased by restricting water use below ET from adequately watered wheat.”
Claim · model-written summary
A cubic equation described grain yield as a function of water use with r = 0.98.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- water usee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Value
- r = 0.98e0
- Qualifier
- Y = −9548 + 46.42 X − 0.06866 X 2 + 0.00003390 X 3e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A relationship between grain yield (Y) , in g/m 2 , and water use (X) , in mm water, was characterized by the expression: Y = −9548 + 46.42 X − 0.06866 X 2 + 0.00003390 X 3 ( r = 0.98).”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation treatment did not change seed weight.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation treatmente0
- Outcome
- Seed weighte0
- Direction
- unaffectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seed weight was unaffected by irrigation treatment.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Cumulative total dry weight was similar among treatments during the first 120 days.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- all treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Cumulative total dry weighte0
- Direction
- similare0
- Qualifier
- first 120 dayse0
- Comparator
- all treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cumulative total dry weight was similar on all treatments for the first 120 days.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Plants headed 7 to 10 days earlier under the driest treatment than under the wettest treatments.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- driest treatmente0
- Outcome
- headede0
- Direction
- earliere0
- Value
- 7 to 10 dayse0
- Comparator
- wettest treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants headed 7 to 10 days earlier and matured 5 or 6 days earlier on the driest treatment than on the wettest treatments.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Plants matured 5 or 6 days earlier under the driest treatment than under the wettest treatments.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- driest treatmente0
- Outcome
- maturede0
- Direction
- earliere0
- Value
- 5 or 6 dayse0
- Comparator
- wettest treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants headed 7 to 10 days earlier and matured 5 or 6 days earlier on the driest treatment than on the wettest treatments.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Earlier maturity may explain much of the water-use and total-dry-matter differences among treatments.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- differences in water use and total dry mattere0
- Qualifier
- Earlier maturitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Earlier maturity could have accounted for most of the differences in water use and total dry matter between treatments”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Water stress was also important in the driest treatment.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- driest treatmente0
- Outcome
- water stress was also importante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water stress was also important in the driest treatment.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Drier treatments produced more wheat heads than wetter treatments.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- driere0
- Outcome
- headse0
- Direction
- moree0
- Comparator
- wetter treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants produced more heads on the drier than on the wetter treatments”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat plants were shorter on the driest treatment.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- driest treatmente0
- Outcome
- shortere0
- Direction
- shortere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“were shorter on the driest treatment.”
t0“Wheat”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
190 papers in the same direction as this paper · 798 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
985 papers more in this group
See all 989 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.