Paper · 2012 · American Journal of Plant Sciences

Phosphate Biofertilizer, Row Spacing and Plant Density Effects on Corn (Zea mays L.) Yield and Weed Growth

Gholam Reza Mohammadi; Mohammad Eghbal Ghobadi; Saeed Sheikheh-Poor

7
claims
9
verbatim quotes
30
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

A field study was conducted at the Agricultural Research Farm of Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran to investigate the effects of phosphate biofertilizer, row spacing and plant density on corn yield and weed growth. The experiment was a factorial with three factors arranged in a randomized complete block design with three replications. The first factor was phosphate biofertilizer (inoculation and non-inoculation), the second was row spacing (conventional (75 cm) and reduced (50 cm)) and the third was plant density (66,666 plants·ha–1 (conventional plant density) 83,333 and 99,999 plants·ha–1 (1.25 and 1.5 times the conventional plant density, respectively)). Results indicated that corn yield and weed growth were significantly influenced by row spacing and plant density. So that, corn yield improved and weed biomass diminished in response to increasing plant density and decreasing row spacing. However, phosphate biofertilizer had no significant effect on corn yield, whereas, weed biomass was notably increased when phosphate biofertilizer was applied. Overall, this study revealed that both yield and weed control in corn field can be improved by alteration of the planting arrangement.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing planting density improved corn yield.

Treatment
increasing plant densitye0
Outcome
corn yielde0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“corn yield improved and weed biomass diminished in response to increasing plant density and decreasing row spacing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 789–903 · show in text ↑
e1

“corn yield and weed growth were significantly influenced by row spacing and plant density”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–778 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Decreasing row spacing improved corn yield.

Treatment
decreasing row spacinge0
Outcome
corn yielde0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“corn yield improved and weed biomass diminished in response to increasing plant density and decreasing row spacing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 789–903 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing plant density diminished weed biomass.

Treatment
increasing plant densitye0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed biomasse0
Direction
diminishede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“corn yield improved and weed biomass diminished in response to increasing plant density and decreasing row spacing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 789–903 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Decreasing row spacing diminished weed biomass.

Treatment
decreasing row spacinge0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed biomasse0
Direction
diminishede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“corn yield improved and weed biomass diminished in response to increasing plant density and decreasing row spacing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 789–903 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphate biofertilizer had no significant effect on corn yield.

Treatment
phosphate biofertilizere0
Outcome
corn yielde0
Direction
no significant effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“phosphate biofertilizer had no significant effect on corn yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 914–977 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphate biofertilizer increased weed biomass.

Treatment
phosphate biofertilizere0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed biomasse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“weed biomass was notably increased when phosphate biofertilizer was applied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 988–1063 · show in text ↑
e1

“on corn yield and weed growth.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 184–214 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude planting arrangement can improve corn yield and weed control.

Outcome
alteration of the planting arrangemente0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“both yield and weed control in corn field can be improved by alteration of the planting arrangement”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1099–1198 · show in text ↑

inoculation · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

phosphorus · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect
See all 4 papers →

density · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

33 papers: 26 positive, 7 negative or no effect

25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. no effect

29 papers more in this group

See all 33 papers →

inoculation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

538 papers: 479 positive, 59 negative or no effect

58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 479 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

534 papers more in this group

See all 538 papers →

phosphorus · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

627 papers: 549 positive, 78 negative or no effect

77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 549 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

623 papers more in this group

See all 627 papers →

density · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

658 papers: 519 positive, 139 negative or no effect

518 papers in the same direction as this paper · 132 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. 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.