Abstract
The effects of no‐till versus conventional farming practices were evaluated on soft wheat functional and nutritional characteristics, including kernel physical properties, whole wheat composition, antioxidant activity, and end‐product quality. Soft white winter wheat cultivar ORCF 102 was evaluated over a two‐year period from three long‐term replicated no‐till versus conventional tillage studies in Oregon. Wheat from the no‐till cropping systems generally had greater test weight, kernel diameter, and kernel weight and had softer kernels compared with wheat from the conventional tillage systems. Compared with the conventional systems, no‐till whole wheat flour had lower protein and SDS sedimentation volume. Ash content as well as most minerals measured (calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, and zinc), except for manganese and phosphorus, were generally slightly lower in no‐till than in conventional wheat. Whole wheat flour from the no‐till cropping systems generally had slightly lower total phenolic content and total antioxidant capacity. Milling properties, including flour yield, break flour yield, and mill score, were not affected by tillage systems. Refined flour from no‐till systems had lower protein, SDS sedimentation volume, and lactic acid and sucrose solvent retention capacities compared with flour from conventional tillage. No‐till wheat generally had greater sugar‐snap cookie diameter than conventionally tilled wheat. In conclusion, no‐till soft white winter wheat generally had slightly reduced nutritional properties (protein, ash, most minerals, and total antioxidant content) compared with wheat from conventionally tilled systems, and it had equivalent or sometimes superior functional properties for baking cookie‐type products.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
No-till wheat generally had greater test weight, kernel diameter, and kernel weight than conventionally tilled wheat.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- no‐till cropping systemse0
- Outcome
- test weight, kernel diameter, and kernel weighte0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat from the no‐till cropping systems generally had greater test weight, kernel diameter, and kernel weight and had softer kernels compared with wheat from the conventional tillage systems.”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till wheat generally had softer kernels than conventionally tilled wheat.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- no‐till cropping systemse0
- Outcome
- kernelse0
- Direction
- softere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat from the no‐till cropping systems generally had greater test weight, kernel diameter, and kernel weight and had softer kernels compared with wheat from the conventional tillage systems.”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till whole wheat flour had lower protein and SDS sedimentation volume than conventional flour.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- no‐tille0
- Outcome
- protein and SDS sedimentation volumee0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- conventional systemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared with the conventional systems, no‐till whole wheat flour had lower protein and SDS sedimentation volume.”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till wheat generally had slightly lower ash, calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, and zinc than conventionally tilled wheat.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- no‐tille0
- Outcome
- Ash content as well as most minerals measured (calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, and zinc)e0
- Direction
- slightly lowere0
- Comparator
- conventional wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ash content as well as most minerals measured (calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, and zinc), except for manganese and phosphorus, were generally slightly lower in no‐till than in conventional wheat.”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till whole wheat flour generally had slightly lower total phenolic content and antioxidant capacity.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- no‐till cropping systemse0
- Outcome
- total phenolic content and total antioxidant capacitye0
- Direction
- slightly lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Whole wheat flour from the no‐till cropping systems generally had slightly lower total phenolic content and total antioxidant capacity.”
Claim · model-written summary
Flour yield, break flour yield and mill score were unaffected by tillage system.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- tillage systemse0
- Outcome
- flour yield, break flour yield, and mill scoree0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Milling properties, including flour yield, break flour yield, and mill score, were not affected by tillage systems.”
t0“Soft Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Refined flour from no-till wheat had lower protein, SDS sedimentation volume, and solvent retention capacities.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- no‐till systemse0
- Outcome
- protein, SDS sedimentation volume, and lactic acid and sucrose solvent retention capacitiese0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Refined flour from no‐till systems had lower protein, SDS sedimentation volume, and lactic acid and sucrose solvent retention capacities compared with flour from conventional tillage.”
t0“Soft Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till wheat generally produced greater sugar-snap cookie diameter than conventionally tilled wheat.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- No‐tille0
- Outcome
- sugar‐snap cookie diametere0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- conventionally tilled wheate0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No‐till wheat generally had greater sugar‐snap cookie diameter than conventionally tilled wheat.”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · quality: phytochemicals · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
cultivation system · quality: phytochemicals · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
cultivation system · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →tillage · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →tillage · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 55 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
68 papers more in this group
See all 72 papers →tillage · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
207 papers in the same direction as this paper · 54 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
263 papers more in this group
See all 267 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
297 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,116 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 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.