Abstract
The methods of fertilizer application tested were as follows: 1) Subsoiling, 2) Broadcasting, 3) Drilling beside planting rows, 4) Drilling between planting rows. With corn and oats, the method of drilling beside planting rows brought the best top growth. With immature soybean and common vetch, it was superior by subsoiling. The yield in each crop was similar in tendency to the top growth, except that of common vetch which decreased owing to lodging caused by excessive growth by the subsoiling method. Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops. Effects of the difference of the method on the root development were recognized with common vetch and oats as differences in distribution of roots around and beneath the fertilizer placed. Subsoiling application promoted the penetration of roots in common vetch only. It was observed that the roots which distributed around the fertilizer were white and fresh. Though no data about the relation between top growth and root weight were obtained in this investigation, the authors assumed detailed studies of quality or viability of root should be important to elucidate such a relation.
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 19
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling fertilizer beside planting rows gave corn the best top growth.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayst0 - Treatment
- drilling beside planting rowse0
- Outcome
- top growthe0
- Direction
- beste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With corn and oats, the method of drilling beside planting rows brought the best top growth.”
t0“corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling fertilizer beside planting rows gave oats the best top growth.
- Taxon
- oats
Avena sativat0 - Treatment
- drilling beside planting rowse0
- Outcome
- top growthe0
- Direction
- beste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With corn and oats, the method of drilling beside planting rows brought the best top growth.”
t0“oats”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling was superior for top growth of immature soybean.
- Taxon
- soybean
Glycine maxt0 - Treatment
- subsoilinge0
- Outcome
- superiore0
- Direction
- superiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With immature soybean and common vetch, it was superior by subsoiling.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling was superior for top growth of common vetch.
- Taxon
- common vetch
_Vicia_sativa.jpg?width=60)
Vicia sativat0 - Treatment
- subsoilinge0
- Outcome
- superiore0
- Direction
- superiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Vicia_sativa.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“With immature soybean and common vetch, it was superior by subsoiling.”
t0“common vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop yields generally followed the top growth pattern except in common vetch.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- similar in tendencye0
- Qualifier
- except that of common vetche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield in each crop was similar in tendency to the top growth, except that of common vetch which decreased owing to lodging caused by excessive growth by the subsoiling method.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Common vetch yield decreased under subsoiling because excessive growth caused lodging.
- Taxon
- common vetchVicia sativat0
- Treatment
- subsoiling methode0
- Outcome
- common vetche0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“common vetch which decreased owing to lodging caused by excessive growth by the subsoiling method”
t0“common vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest growth in soybean.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- growthe0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest yield in soybean.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest growth in corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- growthe0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest yield in corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest growth in common vetch.
- Taxon
- common vetchVicia sativat0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- growthe0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“common vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest yield in common vetch.
- Taxon
- common vetchVicia sativat0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“common vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest growth in oats.
- Taxon
- oatsAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- growthe0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“oats”
Claim · model-written summary
Drilling between rows gave the poorest yield in oats.
- Taxon
- oatsAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- Drilling between rowse0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- most inferiore0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Drilling between rows brought about the most inferior growth and yields in all the crops.”
t0“oats”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer placement altered root distribution around and beneath fertilizer in common vetch.
- Taxon
- common vetchVicia sativae0
- Outcome
- distribution of roots around and beneath the fertilizer placede0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effects of the difference of the method on the root development were recognized with common vetch and oats as differences in distribution of roots around and beneath the fertilizer placed.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer placement altered root distribution around and beneath fertilizer in oats.
- Taxon
- oatsAvena sativae0
- Outcome
- distribution of roots around and beneath the fertilizer placede0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effects of the difference of the method on the root development were recognized with common vetch and oats as differences in distribution of roots around and beneath the fertilizer placed.”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling promoted root penetration in common vetch only.
- Taxon
- common vetchVicia sativae0
- Treatment
- Subsoiling applicatione0
- Outcome
- penetration of rootse0
- Direction
- promotede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Subsoiling application promoted the penetration of roots in common vetch only.”
Claim · model-written summary
Roots around the placed fertilizer were white and fresh.
- Taxon
- common vetchVicia sativat0
- Outcome
- roots which distributed around the fertilizer were white and freshe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the roots which distributed around the fertilizer were white and fresh”
t0“common vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest studying root quality or viability to explain the top growth and root weight relation.
- Taxon
- common vetchVicia sativat0
- Outcome
- detailed studies of quality or viability of roote0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the authors assumed detailed studies of quality or viability of root should be important to elucidate such a relation”
t0“common vetch”
The same questions in other papers
transplanting · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 papers →transplanting · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 88 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
126 papers more in this group
See all 130 papers →transplanting · growth · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
transplanting · yield · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →transplanting · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →transplanting · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 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.