Abstract
SUMMARY Prior studies have established that phosphorus absorption by maize from undisturbed soil is greater than from soil which has been disturbed since the previous period of growth. Those experiments were conducted under controlled conditions and with only two disturbance treatments, namely disturbance of the soil by hand sufficient that it will pass a 5 mm sieve, and no disturbance at all. We present here two experiments in which additional treatments of intermediate degrees of disturbance are included. In a growth chamber experiment, cutting the soil into 1, 2 or 4 cm cubes reduced the phosphorus absorption and shoot dry matter, but the reduction was not as great as that after hand disturbance of the soil. In a field experiment, the phosphorus absorption and shoot dry matter found in a conventional tillage and no‐till treatments were less than in hand‐planted no‐till plots, but greater than with severe soil disturbance. In both experiments increases in shoot dry mass and shoot phosphorus concentration in the less disturbed treatments were not accompanied by an increase in mycorrhizal colonization. This is inconsistent with earlier studies in which colonization was greater in undisturbed soil. Since it has now been demonstrated that increased colonization is not a necessary component in the process whereby lack of disturbance results in improved plant performance, the role of mycorrhizas in this effect should be reconsidered. If mycorrhizas are important in this respect then this can only be by means of changes in the external mycelium. However, without experimental confirmation this interpretation is speculative.
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
Cutting soil into 1, 2, or 4 cm cubes reduced maize phosphorus absorption less than hand disturbance.
- Treatment
- cutting the soil into 1, 2 or 4 cm cubese0
- Outcome
- phosphorus absorptione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- hand disturbance of the soile0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cutting the soil into 1, 2 or 4 cm cubes reduced the phosphorus absorption and shoot dry matter, but the reduction was not as great as that after hand disturbance of the soil”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Cutting soil into cubes reduced maize shoot dry matter less than hand disturbance.
- Treatment
- cutting the soil into 1, 2 or 4 cm cubese0
- Outcome
- shoot dry mattere0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- hand disturbance of the soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cutting the soil into 1, 2 or 4 cm cubes reduced the phosphorus absorption and shoot dry matter, but the reduction was not as great as that after hand disturbance of the soil”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage and no-till plots had lower maize phosphorus absorption than hand-planted no-till plots, but higher than severe disturbance.
- Treatment
- conventional tillage and no‐till treatmentse0
- Outcome
- phosphorus absorptione0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Qualifier
- greater than with severe soil disturbancee0
- Comparator
- hand‐planted no‐till plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the phosphorus absorption and shoot dry matter found in a conventional tillage and no‐till treatments were less than in hand‐planted no‐till plots, but greater than with severe soil disturbance”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage and no-till plots had lower maize shoot dry matter than hand-planted no-till plots, but higher than severe disturbance.
- Treatment
- conventional tillage and no‐till treatmentse0
- Outcome
- shoot dry mattere0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Qualifier
- greater than with severe soil disturbancee0
- Comparator
- hand‐planted no‐till plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the phosphorus absorption and shoot dry matter found in a conventional tillage and no‐till treatments were less than in hand‐planted no‐till plots, but greater than with severe soil disturbance”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Less disturbed treatments increased maize shoot dry mass without increased mycorrhizal colonization.
- Treatment
- less disturbed treatmentse0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizale0symbiont
- Outcome
- shoot dry masse0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Qualifier
- not accompanied by an increase in mycorrhizal colonizatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increases in shoot dry mass and shoot phosphorus concentration in the less disturbed treatments were not accompanied by an increase in mycorrhizal colonization”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Less disturbed treatments increased maize shoot phosphorus concentration without increased mycorrhizal colonization.
- Treatment
- less disturbed treatmentse0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizale0symbiont
- Outcome
- shoot phosphorus concentratione0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Qualifier
- not accompanied by an increase in mycorrhizal colonizatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increases in shoot dry mass and shoot phosphorus concentration in the less disturbed treatments were not accompanied by an increase in mycorrhizal colonization”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Improved maize performance with less disturbance did not require increased mycorrhizal colonization.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increased colonization is not a necessary component in the process whereby lack of disturbance results in improved plant performance”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 29 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →pruning · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →tillage · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 93 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 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 →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.