Abstract
Abstract A greater understanding of maize ( Zea mays L.) nodal root response to soil ridging and tillage systems is needed to maximize the benefits of ridge‐till and other conservation tillage systems. Field (1992 and 1993 near Marshalltown, IA) and greenhouse (two studies with two trials each) experiments were conducted to examine the effect of soil ridging, height of ridging, and three tillage systems (no‐till, ridge‐till, and chisel‐plow) on the number and stem node position of maize nodal roots and on internode length. Field plants were ridged during cultivation. In the greenhouse, ridging was simulated by using polyvinyl chloride rings to hold soil around the base of plants. Numbers of nodal roots, numbers of nodes developing functional roots, internode lengths, shoot dry weights, and grain yields (field study) were determined. In one greenhouse experiment, unridged plants developed an average of 38.4 functional nodal roots, while ridged plants developed 50.0, an increase of 30%. In the same greenhouse experiment, ridging significantly increased lengths of Internodes 6 and 7, which were covered with soil during ridging. Average length of Internode 7 increased from 64 mm to 101 mm with ridging. Increasing ridge height increased internode length and number of nodal roots in the controlled greenhouse experiments, but not in the field. In field experiments, ridge‐till caused development of significantly more functional nodal roots as compared with no‐till (1992 and 1993) and chisel‐plow (1992). Plants from no‐tiil developed 53.1 and 46.0 functional nodal roots in 1992 and 1993, respectively, while plants from ridgetill developed 58.7 and 49.1 roots. Shoot dry weight and grain yield were not affected by ridging or tillage treatments in the greenhouse or field.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse ridging increased functional nodal roots from 38.4 to 50.0, a 30% increase.
- Treatment
- ridged plantse0
- Outcome
- functional nodal rootse0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 30%e0
- Comparator
- unridged plantse0
- Setting
- greenhousee0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In one greenhouse experiment, unridged plants developed an average of 38.4 functional nodal roots, while ridged plants developed 50.0, an increase of 30%.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridging significantly increased the lengths of soil-covered internodes 6 and 7 in the greenhouse.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the same greenhouse experiment, ridging significantly increased lengths of Internodes 6 and 7, which were covered with soil during ridging.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridging increased average internode 7 length from 64 mm to 101 mm.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average length of Internode 7 increased from 64 mm to 101 mm with ridging.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Greater ridge height increased internode length in controlled greenhouse experiments, but not in the field.
- Treatment
- Increasing ridge heighte0
- Outcome
- internode lengthe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- but not in the fielde0
- Setting
- controlled greenhouse experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing ridge height increased internode length and number of nodal roots in the controlled greenhouse experiments, but not in the field.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Greater ridge height increased nodal root number in controlled greenhouse experiments, but not in the field.
- Treatment
- Increasing ridge heighte0
- Outcome
- number of nodal rootse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- but not in the fielde0
- Setting
- controlled greenhouse experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing ridge height increased internode length and number of nodal roots in the controlled greenhouse experiments, but not in the field.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridge-till produced significantly more functional nodal roots than no-till in the field in 1992 and 1993.
- Treatment
- ridge‐tille0
- Outcome
- functional nodal rootse0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- 1992 and 1993e0
- Comparator
- no‐tille0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ridge‐till caused development of significantly more functional nodal roots as compared with no‐till (1992 and 1993) and chisel‐plow (1992).”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridge-till produced significantly more functional nodal roots than chisel-plow in the field in 1992.
- Treatment
- ridge‐tille0
- Outcome
- functional nodal rootse0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- 1992e0
- Comparator
- chisel‐plowe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ridge‐till caused development of significantly more functional nodal roots as compared with no‐till (1992 and 1993) and chisel‐plow (1992).”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till plants had 53.1 functional nodal roots in 1992 versus 58.7 under ridge-till.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants from no‐tiil developed 53.1 and 46.0 functional nodal roots in 1992 and 1993, respectively, while plants from ridgetill developed 58.7 and 49.1 roots.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till plants had 46.0 functional nodal roots in 1993 versus 49.1 under ridge-till.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants from no‐tiil developed 53.1 and 46.0 functional nodal roots in 1992 and 1993, respectively, while plants from ridgetill developed 58.7 and 49.1 roots.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridging and tillage did not affect shoot dry weight in greenhouse or field studies.
- Treatment
- ridging or tillage treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Shoot dry weighte0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Setting
- greenhouse or fielde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shoot dry weight and grain yield were not affected by ridging or tillage treatments in the greenhouse or field.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridging and tillage did not affect grain yield in greenhouse or field studies.
- Treatment
- ridging or tillage treatmentse0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- not affectede0
- Setting
- greenhouse or fielde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shoot dry weight and grain yield were not affected by ridging or tillage treatments in the greenhouse or field.”
t0“Maize Nodal Root Response”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
86 papers in the same direction as this paper · 196 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 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.