Abstract
Conservation Agriculture (CA) has been shown to improve cropping system performance around the world. However, there is limited research on this practice in the annual double cropping areas of the North China Plain and consequently limited uptake of the technology by the farming community. Data from a field experiment (2005 to 2011) conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China, were used to compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT) on growth, yield, and water use of winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.). Results demonstrated that PRB increased soil water content (0 to 0.3 m [0 to 0.98 ft] depth; >8%) and reduced bulk density by 5.1%. Permanent raised bed soil temperatures were stabilized during winter wheat and summer maize production, compared to NT and TT treatments. Over the six years, PRB yields increased by >3% and gross production water use index (GPWUI) improved by >2.5% compared to TT, due to improved soil properties and crop performance. However, the impact of the changed management practices was not realized until the final two seasons, when yields improved by >6%. Accordingly, differences in farming profits, when viewed over the six years were intangible, but improved significantly by >20% in the final two seasons. These improvements in soil properties, yield, and water use are of considerable importance for food security and sustainable agriculture in the North China Plain; however, limited understanding of the farming system and extended timeframes required before realizing beneficial returns continue to limit widespread adoption.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Permanent raised beds increased soil water content (0 to 0.3 m depth) by more than 8%.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)
Triticum aestivum
Zea mayse3 - Treatment
- permanent raised beds (PRB)e2
- Outcome
- soil water contente1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- >8%e1
- Qualifier
- 0 to 0.3 m [0 to 0.98 ft] depthe1
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Results demonstrated that PRB increased soil water content (0 to 0.3 m [0 to 0.98 ft] depth; >8%)”
e2“compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT)”
e3“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e4“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
Claim · model-written summary
Permanent raised beds reduced bulk density by 5.1%.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse3
- Treatment
- permanent raised beds (PRB)e2
- Outcome
- bulk densitye1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 5.1%e1
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“and reduced bulk density by 5.1%”
e2“compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT)”
e3“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e4“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
Claim · model-written summary
Permanent raised bed soil temperatures were stabilized during winter wheat and summer maize production compared to NT and TT treatments.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse3
- Treatment
- Permanent raised bede1
- Outcome
- soil temperaturese1
- Direction
- stabilizede1
- Comparator
- NT and TT treatmentse1
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Permanent raised bed soil temperatures were stabilized during winter wheat and summer maize production, compared to NT and TT treatments”
e2“compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT)”
e3“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e4“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
Claim · model-written summary
Over six years, permanent raised beds increased yields by more than 3% relative to traditional tillage.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse3
- Treatment
- permanent raised beds (PRB)e2
- Outcome
- yieldse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- >3%e1
- Qualifier
- Over the six yearse1
- Comparator
- traditional tillage (TT)e2
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Over the six years, PRB yields increased by >3% and gross production water use index (GPWUI) improved by >2.5% compared to TT”
e2“compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT)”
e3“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e4“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
Claim · model-written summary
Permanent raised beds improved gross production water use index (GPWUI) by more than 2.5% relative to traditional tillage.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse3
- Treatment
- permanent raised beds (PRB)e2
- Outcome
- gross production water use index (GPWUI)e1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- >2.5%e1
- Comparator
- TTe1
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“gross production water use index (GPWUI) improved by >2.5% compared to TT”
e2“compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT)”
e3“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e4“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
Claim · model-written summary
The impact of the changed management practices on yields was not realized until the final two seasons, when yields improved by more than 6%.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse2
- Treatment
- changed management practicese1
- Outcome
- yieldse1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- >6%e1
- Qualifier
- not realized until the final two seasonse1
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the impact of the changed management practices was not realized until the final two seasons, when yields improved by >6%”
e2“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e3“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
Claim · model-written summary
Over the six years, differences in farming profits between tillage practices were intangible.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse3
- Treatment
- permanent raised beds (PRB)e2
- Outcome
- farming profitse1
- Qualifier
- when viewed over the six yearse1
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae4
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“differences in farming profits, when viewed over the six years were intangible, but improved significantly by >20% in the final two seasons”
e2“compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT)”
e3“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e4“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
Claim · model-written summary
In the final two seasons, farming profits improved significantly by more than 20%.
- Taxon
- winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse3
- Treatment
- permanent raised beds (PRB)e2
- Outcome
- farming profitse1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Value
- >20%e1
- Qualifier
- in the final two seasonse1
- Setting
- Daxing, Beijing, Chinae4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“differences in farming profits, when viewed over the six years were intangible, but improved significantly by >20% in the final two seasons”
e2“compare the effects of tillage practices, namely permanent raised beds (PRB), no-tillage (NT), and traditional tillage (TT)”
e3“winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and summer maize (Zea mays L.)”
e4“conducted in Daxing, Beijing, China”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
113 papers more in this group
See all 117 papers →tillage · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
79 papers more in this group
See all 83 papers →cultivation system · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
70 papers in the same direction as this paper · 44 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
117 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
138 papers more in this group
See all 142 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 papers →cultivation system · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
109 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
151 papers more in this group
See all 155 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
- positive
- no effect
- negative
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 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.