Paper · 2015

The Effects Wheat Plant Residues Management, Sugar Beet Quantitative and Qualitative Characteristics under Conservation and Conventional Tillage Systems

Salman Salehian; Hossein Najafi; Seyyed Mohammad Javad Mirhadi; et al.

7
claims
18
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

In order to investigate the effect of tillage kinds and wheat residues and their interactions on qualitative and quantitative yield sugar beet, an experiment in a split plot design in a randomized complete block design in the farming year at the 2012-2013 was conducted. The main factor includes tillage in two levels of conventional and conservation and sub factor residues of wheat in four levels includes zero (control), 1, 3 and 5 tons per hectare. According to the variance analysis results of tillage at one percent probable on the leaf dry weight and at the five percent probable on the leaf fresh weight, root dry weight and potassium has a significant effect, but on the root fresh weight, sodium, harmful nitrogen, sugar content, alkalinity, sugar molasses has not meaningful effect. Also the wheat residues and interaction effect of tillage with wheat residues had no significant effect on the measured parameters. The obtained results of mean comparison showed that the conventional tillage causes more leaf fresh

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage significantly affected sugar beet leaf dry weight at one percent probability.

Treatment
tillagee0
Outcome
leaf dry weighte0
Qualifier
one percent probablee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“tillage at one percent probable on the leaf dry weight”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 499–553 · show in text ↑
e1

“has a significant effect”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 643–667 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugar Beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–55 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage significantly affected sugar beet leaf fresh weight, root dry weight and potassium at five percent probability.

Treatment
tillagee1
Outcome
leaf fresh weight, root dry weight and potassiume0
Qualifier
five percent probablee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“at the five percent probable on the leaf fresh weight, root dry weight and potassium has a significant effect”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 558–667 · show in text ↑
e1

“tillage in two levels of conventional and conservation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 296–350 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugar Beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–55 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage had no significant effect on root fresh weight, sodium and harmful nitrogen in sugar beet.

Treatment
tillagee1
Outcome
root fresh weight, sodium, harmful nitrogene0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“but on the root fresh weight, sodium, harmful nitrogen, sugar content, alkalinity, sugar molasses has not meaningful effect”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 669–792 · show in text ↑
e1

“tillage in two levels of conventional and conservation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 296–350 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugar Beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–55 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage had no significant effect on sugar content, alkalinity and sugar molasses in sugar beet.

Treatment
tillagee1
Outcome
sugar content, alkalinity, sugar molassese0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“but on the root fresh weight, sodium, harmful nitrogen, sugar content, alkalinity, sugar molasses has not meaningful effect”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 669–792 · show in text ↑
e1

“tillage in two levels of conventional and conservation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 296–350 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugar Beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–55 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat residues had no significant effect on measured sugar beet parameters.

Treatment
wheat residuese0
Outcome
measured parameterse0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the wheat residues and interaction effect of tillage with wheat residues had no significant effect on the measured parameters”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 799–924 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugar Beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–55 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The tillage-by-wheat-residue interaction had no significant effect on measured sugar beet parameters.

Treatment
tillage with wheat residuese0
Outcome
measured parameterse0

Not reportedDirection

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“interaction effect of tillage with wheat residues had no significant effect on the measured parameters”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 822–924 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugar Beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–55 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage produced greater sugar beet leaf fresh weight.

Treatment
conventional tillagee0
Outcome
leaf freshe0
Direction
moree0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the conventional tillage causes more leaf fresh”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 978–1025 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sugar Beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 45–55 · show in text ↑

tillage · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

22 papers: 13 positive, 9 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

18 papers more in this group

See all 22 papers →

tillage · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

24 papers: 15 positive, 9 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 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.