Abstract
Reduced-till (RT) is compared to no-till (NT) on a western Kansas farm using elevated crop residue levels and higher intensity opportunity cropping. Per acre expenses, net revenue and risk are determined with and without opportunity cropping. NT opportunity cropping is more profitable than RT eco-fallow using corn; however, risks and expenses are greater. Higher intensity NT cropping, with intensity decreased when soil moisture at planting is inadequate, increased net revenue and risk.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 5
Claim · model-written summary
No till opportunity cropping was more profitable than reduced till eco fallow using corn.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- NT opportunity croppinge0
- Outcome
- profitablee0
- Direction
- more profitablee0
- Comparator
- RT eco-fallowe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NT opportunity cropping is more profitable than RT eco-fallow using corn”
Claim · model-written summary
No till opportunity cropping had greater risks than reduced till eco fallow.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- NT opportunity croppinge0
- Outcome
- riskse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- RT eco-fallowe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NT opportunity cropping is more profitable than RT eco-fallow using corn; however, risks and expenses are greater”
Claim · model-written summary
No till opportunity cropping had greater expenses than reduced till eco fallow.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- NT opportunity croppinge0
- Outcome
- expensese0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- RT eco-fallowe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NT opportunity cropping is more profitable than RT eco-fallow using corn; however, risks and expenses are greater”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher intensity no till cropping with intensity reduced when planting soil moisture was inadequate increased net revenue.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- Higher intensity NT croppinge0
- Outcome
- net revenuee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- with intensity decreased when soil moisture at planting is inadequatee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher intensity NT cropping, with intensity decreased when soil moisture at planting is inadequate, increased net revenue and risk”
e1“NT opportunity cropping is more profitable than RT eco-fallow using corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher intensity no till cropping with intensity reduced when planting soil moisture was inadequate increased risk.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- Higher intensity NT croppinge0
- Outcome
- riske0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- with intensity decreased when soil moisture at planting is inadequatee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher intensity NT cropping, with intensity decreased when soil moisture at planting is inadequate, increased net revenue and risk”
e1“NT opportunity cropping is more profitable than RT eco-fallow using corn”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
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.