Abstract
Understanding the response of labile soil organic nitrogen (SON) pools to soil surface mulching is essential in identifying changes in soil N availability. Three treatments included non‐mulched (CK), gravel‐mulched (GM), and plastic film‐mulched (FM), based on a 5‐yr spring maize ( Zea mays L.) field experiment in northwestern China. Compared with the CK, the GM and FM treatments significantly increased the grain yield and aboveground biomass, while had no effect on the soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) contents after 5 yr of this study. Compared with the CK, the GM and FM treatments significantly decreased light fraction organic N by 12.2 and 6.5 mg kg −1 , respectively, and extractable organic N by 7.7 and 9.3 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer; while significantly increased water soluble organic N by 1.6 and 1.5 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer, respectively, and by 1.3 and 1.2 mg kg −1 in the 20‐ to 40‐cm layer after 4 yr of this study. Meanwhile, the FM treatment significantly increased the microbial biomass N by 19.5 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer compared with the CK after 4 yr of this study. In general, the GM and FM treatments increased maize productivity without detriment to the SOC and TN balance compared with the CK. The FM treatment displayed greater effects on enhancing crop yield and increasing labile SON pools than GM. It is suitable to choose plastic film mulching over gravel mulching to have increases in crop yields and improvements in soil N availability in semiarid farmland.
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Gravel mulch significantly increased grain yield against nonmulched control.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared with the CK, the GM and FM treatments significantly increased the grain yield and aboveground biomass”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch significantly increased grain yield and biomass against nonmulched control.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared with the CK, the GM and FM treatments significantly increased the grain yield and aboveground biomass”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gravel mulch had no effect on SOC and TN contents after five years.
- Treatment
- GMe0
- Outcome
- soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) contentse0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the GM and FM treatments significantly increased the grain yield and aboveground biomass, while had no effect on the soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) contents after 5 yr”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch had no effect on SOC and TN contents after five years.
- Treatment
- FMe0
- Outcome
- soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) contentse0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the GM and FM treatments significantly increased the grain yield and aboveground biomass, while had no effect on the soil organic carbon (SOC) and total nitrogen (TN) contents after 5 yr”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gravel mulch decreased light fraction organic N by 12.2 mg kg−1.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the GM and FM treatments significantly decreased light fraction organic N by 12.2 and 6.5 mg kg −1 , respectively”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch decreased light fraction organic N by 6.5 mg kg−1.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the GM and FM treatments significantly decreased light fraction organic N by 12.2 and 6.5 mg kg −1 , respectively”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gravel mulch decreased extractable organic N by 7.7 mg kg−1.
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“extractable organic N by 7.7 and 9.3 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch decreased extractable organic N by 9.3 mg kg−1.
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“extractable organic N by 7.7 and 9.3 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gravel mulch increased water soluble organic N in surface soil by 1.6 mg kg−1.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly increased water soluble organic N by 1.6 and 1.5 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch increased water soluble organic N in surface soil by 1.5 mg kg−1.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly increased water soluble organic N by 1.6 and 1.5 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gravel mulch increased water soluble organic N in deep soil by 1.3 mg kg−1.
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“by 1.3 and 1.2 mg kg −1 in the 20‐ to 40‐cm layer after 4 yr”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch increased water soluble organic N in deep soil by 1.2 mg kg−1.
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“by 1.3 and 1.2 mg kg −1 in the 20‐ to 40‐cm layer after 4 yr”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch increased microbial biomass N by 19.5 mg kg−1 in surface soil.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the FM treatment significantly increased the microbial biomass N by 19.5 mg kg −1 in the 0‐ to 20‐cm layer compared with the CK after 4 yr”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch had a greater crop yield effect than gravel mulch.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The FM treatment displayed greater effects on enhancing crop yield and increasing labile SON pools than GM”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Film mulch had a greater labile SON effect than gravel mulch.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The FM treatment displayed greater effects on enhancing crop yield and increasing labile SON pools than GM”
t0“Spring Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors recommend plastic film over gravel mulch for yield and soil N availability.
- Outcome
- choose plastic film mulching over gravel mulchinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“It is suitable to choose plastic film mulching over gravel mulching to have increases in crop yields and improvements in soil N availability”
t0“Spring Maize”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 papers →mulching · soil: biology · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →transgenic · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
50 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
65 papers more in this group
See all 69 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 papers →transgenic · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
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.