Abstract
Intensive cultivation practices require significant energy inputs and repeated working of the soil, ultimately resulting in a breakdown of soil structure. Nitrogen (N) mineralization can also be extremely high in these situations, especially following permanent pasture. Where this nutrient release exceeds the demand of the subsequent crop it can create an environmental risk. Four field trials were undertaken in farm paddocks to determine if strip tillage, a reduced cultivation approach, could be used to establish maize silage and reduce soil N mineralisation. Trials were conducted in two seasons (2007-08, 2008-09). At each site strip tillage (ST) was compared to conventional tillage (CT). There were 4 or 6 replicates of each treatment. Tillage practice had no significant effect on mean plant spacing at any site. There was also no effect of tillage practice on silage yield at harvest; across sites, yields averaged 22.6 t DM ha -1 and 23.0 t DM ha -1 for the ST and CT treatments, respectively. The dry matter (DM %) content averaged 35% across treatments and sites. Early in the season, soil minN levels were often significantly (P<0.01 to 0.08) lower under ST. This was due primarily to lower minN in the mid-row of ST plots than in the mid-row of CT plots (reflecting differences in cultivation in this zone). An estimation of the balance of minN supply during the season (accounting for soil N prior to cultivation and at harvest, fertiliser N, and plant N in the harvested silage) indicated less minN was released under ST. Thus ST appears to have good potential as an alternative approach to establish maize silage and to reduce soil N mineralisation.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage practice had no significant effect on mean plant spacing of maize at any site.
- Treatment
- strip tillage (ST)e1
- Outcome
- mean plant spacinge0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage (CT)e1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“Tillage practice had no significant effect on mean plant spacing at any site”
e1“At each site strip tillage (ST) was compared to conventional tillage (CT)”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage practice did not affect maize silage yield at harvest; yields averaged 22.6 t DM ha -1 under strip tillage and 23.0 t DM ha -1 under conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- strip tillage (ST)e1
- Outcome
- silage yielde0
- Direction
- no effecte0
- Value
- 22.6 t DM ha -1 and 23.0 t DM ha -1e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage (CT)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“There was also no effect of tillage practice on silage yield at harvest; across sites, yields averaged 22.6 t DM ha -1 and 23.0 t DM ha -1 for the ST and CT treatments, respectively”
e1“At each site strip tillage (ST) was compared to conventional tillage (CT)”
Claim · model-written summary
Dry matter content of the maize silage averaged 35% across treatments and sites.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“The dry matter (DM %) content averaged 35% across treatments and sites”
Claim · model-written summary
Early in the season, soil mineral N was often significantly lower under strip tillage than under conventional tillage (P<0.01 to 0.08).
- Treatment
- strip tillage (ST)e1
- Outcome
- soil minN levelse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- Early in the seasone0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage (CT)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“Early in the season, soil minN levels were often significantly (P<0.01 to 0.08) lower under ST”
e1“At each site strip tillage (ST) was compared to conventional tillage (CT)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mineral N in the mid-row was lower in strip tillage plots than in conventional tillage plots.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“lower minN in the mid-row of ST plots than in the mid-row of CT plots”
Claim · model-written summary
The seasonal mineral N balance estimate indicated less mineral N was released under strip tillage.
- Treatment
- strip tillage (ST)e1
- Outcome
- minN was releasede0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage (CT)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize”
e0“indicated less minN was released under ST”
e1“At each site strip tillage (ST) was compared to conventional tillage (CT)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude strip tillage has good potential as an alternative approach to establish maize silage and reduce soil N mineralisation.
- Outcome
- alternative approach to establish maize silage and to reduce soil N mineralisatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Thus ST appears to have good potential as an alternative approach to establish maize silage and to reduce soil N mineralisation”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
286 papers in the same direction as this paper · 812 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 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.