Abstract
Abstract The objectives were to compare the effects of two plastic film systems [perforated (PP) and complete‐cover (CC) systems] on the yield and quality of forage maize, and to study the effects of seeding rate on maize grown with, and without, plastic film. Between 1995 and 1998 (Experiments 1 and 2), comparisons were made of maize without plastic film systems (NP), sown through clear plastic film (PP) and covered with clear plastic film (CC). In the CC system, the plastic was removed manually from the crop. Two dates of removal (CC1 and CC2) were compared in 1995, while four removal dates (CC1, CC2, CC3 and CC4) were examined in 1996–98. In 1996–98, three sowing dates (early, mid‐April; mid, early‐May; late, mid‐May) were also examined. Four seeding rates (78 200, 93 900, 107 000 and 126 000 seeds ha −1 ) were examined in two experiments (Experiment 3 in 1996 and Experiment 4 in 1996–98). No plastic was used in Experiment 3, while three plastic treatments (NP, PP and CC) were examined in Experiment 4. In the CC treatment, the plastic film was removed at the six‐ to eight‐leaf stage. In Experiment 1, the PP treatment gave lower DM yields than the NP treatment due to frost damage which killed 0·30 of the plants in the PP treatment. Plants were undamaged by frost in both CC treatments, and the CC2 treatment (plastic removal at the six‐leaf stage) gave significant increases in DM and grain yields. In Experiment 2, averaged over years and sowing dates, DM yields were significantly increased by all plastic film treatments except CC4. All plastic film treatments gave significantly earlier tassel emergence than the NP treatment, and significantly increased grain yields and contents of DM and grain. The highest yields of DM and grain were obtained from the PP system. Within the CC treatments, leaving the plastic film intact until the ten‐leaf stage (CC4) gave lower yields of DM and grain than removing the plastic film at an earlier stage. Averaged over years, the largest DM yields were obtained from the CC system with early‐sown material, while the yield differences between treatments with late‐sown crops under this system were not significant. Highest DM and grain yields were obtained with early sowing, while late sowing gave lower contents of DM and grain, and later tassel emergence. In Experiments 3 and 4, DM and grain yields increased as seeding rate increased up to 126 000 seeds ha −1 with NP and CC plastic treatments. With the PP treatment, DM yield reached a plateau at 107 000 seeds ha −1 . Seeding rate did not significantly affect DM content in either experiments but grain content declined in both experiments as seeding rate increased.
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
PP film lowered dry matter yield relative to no film in Experiment 1.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the PP treatment gave lower DM yields than the NP treatment due to frost damage which killed 0·30 of the plants in the PP treatment.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Frost killed 0.30 of PP plants.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“frost damage which killed 0·30 of the plants in the PP treatment”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Frost did not damage plants in either complete-cover treatment.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants were undamaged by frost in both CC treatments”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
CC2 significantly increased dry matter and grain yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the CC2 treatment (plastic removal at the six‐leaf stage) gave significant increases in DM and grain yields.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
All plastic treatments except CC4 significantly increased dry matter yield.
- Treatment
- all plastic film treatments except CC4e0
- Outcome
- DM yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- NP treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“DM yields were significantly increased by all plastic film treatments except CC4.”
e2“the PP treatment gave lower DM yields than the NP treatment due to frost damage which killed 0·30 of the plants in the PP treatment.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic film treatments significantly advanced tassel emergence.
- Treatment
- All plastic film treatmentse0
- Outcome
- tassel emergencee0
- Direction
- earliere0
- Comparator
- NP treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All plastic film treatments gave significantly earlier tassel emergence than the NP treatment”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic film treatments significantly increased grain yield and dry matter and grain content.
- Treatment
- plastic film treatmentse1
- Outcome
- grain yields and contents of DM and graine0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- NP treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly increased grain yields and contents of DM and grain.”
e1“DM yields were significantly increased by all plastic film treatments except CC4.”
e2“the PP treatment gave lower DM yields than the NP treatment due to frost damage which killed 0·30 of the plants in the PP treatment.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
PP produced the highest dry matter and grain yields.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest yields of DM and grain were obtained from the PP system.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
CC4 had lower dry matter and grain yields than earlier film removal.
- Treatment
- leaving the plastic film intact until the ten‐leaf stage (CC4)e0
- Outcome
- yields of DM and graine0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- removing the plastic film at an earlier stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“leaving the plastic film intact until the ten‐leaf stage (CC4) gave lower yields of DM and grain than removing the plastic film at an earlier stage.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Early-sown CC maize gave the largest dry matter yields.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the largest DM yields were obtained from the CC system with early‐sown material”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
With late sowing under CC, yield differences between treatments were not significant.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the yield differences between treatments with late‐sown crops under this system were not significant.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Early sowing gave highest dry matter and grain yields.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Highest DM and grain yields were obtained with early sowing”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Late sowing reduced dry matter and grain contents.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“late sowing gave lower contents of DM and grain, and later tassel emergence.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Late sowing delayed tassel emergence.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“late sowing gave lower contents of DM and grain, and later tassel emergence.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing seeding rate to 126,000 seeds per hectare raised dry matter and grain yields with NP and CC.
- Treatment
- seeding rate increased up to 126 000 seeds ha −1e0
- Outcome
- DM and grain yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“DM and grain yields increased as seeding rate increased up to 126 000 seeds ha −1 with NP and CC plastic treatments.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
With PP, dry matter yield plateaued at 107,000 seeds per hectare.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With the PP treatment, DM yield reached a plateau at 107 000 seeds ha −1 .”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Seeding rate did not significantly affect dry matter content.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seeding rate did not significantly affect DM content in either experiments”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain content declined as seeding rate increased.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain content declined in both experiments as seeding rate increased.”
t0“Agronomic factors affecting the yield and quality of forage maize in Ireland: effect of plastic film system and seeding rate”
The same questions in other papers
density · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →sowing time · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
177 papers in the same direction as this paper · 89 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
265 papers more in this group
See all 269 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 papers →density · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
518 papers in the same direction as this paper · 132 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
654 papers more in this group
See all 658 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.