Abstract
SUMMARY Competition among maize plants in the vegetative stage of growth was postponed by application of nitrogen to the seed bed and by maintaining soil moisture near field capacity. The amount of available nitrogen was a critical factor in determining the effect of the competitive balance between nitrogen and light on maize yield. The supply of either affected the capacity of the crop to utilize the other, but ultimately light became the dominant factor. Soil moisture deficits of up to 1.0 in from field capacity, in the early stages of vegetative growth, did not reduce dry-matter accumulation and uptake of nitrogen, but in the absence of weed competition and post-planting cultivation soil moisture losses in the early stages of crop growth may be small. In 1966, maize responded quicker to surface applied than to deep-placed nitrogen and utilized the surface applied nitrogen for dry-matter accumulation more effectively. Provided that there was initially an adequate supply of nitrogen in the seed bed, there appeared to be no advantage to total yield from application of nitrogen top dressings to maize. In the West Midlands, under conditions of adequate nutrient and soil moisture supply, the optimum plant population for commercial production of forage maize was about 40000 per acre.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Seedbed nitrogen postponed competition among vegetative maize plants.
- Treatment
- application of nitrogen to the seed bede0
- Outcome
- Competition among maize plantse0
- Direction
- postponede0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Competition among maize plants in the vegetative stage of growth was postponed by application of nitrogen to the seed bed”
Claim · model-written summary
Maintaining soil moisture near field capacity postponed competition.
- Treatment
- maintaining soil moisture near field capacitye0
- Outcome
- Competition among maize plantse0
- Direction
- postponede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Competition among maize plants in the vegetative stage of growth was postponed by application of nitrogen to the seed bed and by maintaining soil moisture near field capacity.”
Claim · model-written summary
Available nitrogen critically determined the effect of nitrogen–light competition on yield.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The amount of available nitrogen was a critical factor in determining the effect of the competitive balance between nitrogen and light on maize yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Light ultimately became the dominant factor in maize yield competition.
- Outcome
- light became the dominant factore0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ultimately light became the dominant factor.”
t0“Competition in maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Early moisture deficits up to 1.0 in did not reduce dry matter accumulation.
- Treatment
- Soil moisture deficits of up to 1.0 in from field capacitye0
- Outcome
- dry-matter accumulatione0
- Direction
- did not reducee0
- Comparator
- field capacitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil moisture deficits of up to 1.0 in from field capacity, in the early stages of vegetative growth, did not reduce dry-matter accumulation and uptake of nitrogen”
t0“Competition in maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Early moisture deficits up to 1.0 in did not reduce nitrogen uptake.
- Treatment
- Soil moisture deficits of up to 1.0 in from field capacitye0
- Outcome
- uptake of nitrogene0
- Direction
- did not reducee0
- Comparator
- field capacitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil moisture deficits of up to 1.0 in from field capacity, in the early stages of vegetative growth, did not reduce dry-matter accumulation and uptake of nitrogen”
t0“Competition in maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize responded faster to surface applied than deep placed nitrogen.
- Treatment
- surface appliede0
- Outcome
- maize respondede0
- Direction
- quickere0
- Comparator
- deep-placed nitrogene0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize responded quicker to surface applied than to deep-placed nitrogen”
Claim · model-written summary
Surface nitrogen supported dry matter accumulation more effectively than deep placement.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“utilized the surface applied nitrogen for dry-matter accumulation more effectively.”
t0“Competition in maize”
Claim · model-written summary
With adequate seedbed nitrogen, top dressings gave no total yield advantage.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Provided that there was initially an adequate supply of nitrogen in the seed bed, there appeared to be no advantage to total yield from application of nitrogen top dressings to maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Optimum forage maize population in the West Midlands was about 40000 per acre.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the West Midlands, under conditions of adequate nutrient and soil moisture supply, the optimum plant population for commercial production of forage maize was about 40000 per acre.”
The same questions in other papers
soil water · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →nitrogen · organism · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →soil water · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 42 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
60 papers more in this group
See all 64 papers →nitrogen · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1,905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 234 in the opposite direction · 45 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
2,181 papers more in this group
See all 2,185 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
422 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3,485 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 papers →soil water · organism · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.