Abstract
To examine the impacts of deficit irrigation on the water use efficiency in maize/faba bean relay intercropping in no tillage system an experiment was done in research Farm, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Razi University during 2010-2011 growing season. The study was based on split factorial in a randomized complete block (RCB) design with three replications. Main plots were different maize irrigation levels (%100, %90, %80 and %70 of maize water requirement), and subplots consisted of a factorial combination of cropping systems (Maize/faba bean relay intercropping and maize and faba bean sole cropping) and tillage system (no tillage and conventional tillage). Results showed that with decreasing water supply, crop yield decline but water use efficiency increase. Deficit irrigation can significantly increase the water use efficiency in forage maize. Although maize forage yield in conventional tillage was higher than no tillage system but it was not affected by different cropping systems.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Lower water supply reduced crop yield.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Forage Maize”
e0“with decreasing water supply, crop yield decline”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower water supply increased water use efficiency.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Forage Maize”
e0“with decreasing water supply, crop yield decline but water use efficiency increase”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation significantly increased forage maize water use efficiency.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Forage Maize”
e0“Deficit irrigation can significantly increase the water use efficiency in forage maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage produced higher maize forage yield than no tillage.
- Treatment
- conventional tillagee0
- Outcome
- maize forage yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- no tillage systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Forage Maize”
e0“maize forage yield in conventional tillage was higher than no tillage system”
Claim · model-written summary
Cropping system did not affect maize forage yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Forage Maize”
e0“maize forage yield in conventional tillage was higher than no tillage system but it was not affected by different cropping systems”
The same questions in other papers
cultivation system · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
44 papers in the same direction as this paper · 110 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
151 papers more in this group
See all 155 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
283 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
320 papers more in this group
See all 324 papers →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
224 papers in the same direction as this paper · 791 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 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.