Abstract
The influence of secondary soil disturbance on the emergence pattern and seed bank depletion of an annual weed community in a long-term, no-tillage corn cropping system was determined in 1992 and 1993. As a component of this research, the seed bank was characterized prior to implementation of soil disturbance treatments. The seed bank was initially composed of common lambsquarters, redroot pigweed, and giant foxtail, with approximately 55, 36, and 8% of the total viable seeds, respectively. The remaining 1% was comprised of five other species in 1992 and eight in 1993. The spatial distribution of viable seeds of each species, except common lambsquarters and redroot pigweed, was described by a negative binomial distribution. Three dispersion indices indicated that seeds of individual and total weed species were aggregated and that the level of aggregation of viable seeds of a species was associated with seed density; at lower seed densities, the level of aggregation was greater. Soil disturbance increased common lambsquarters emergence 6-fold in 1992 relative to nondisturbed soil, but did not influence emergence in 1993. Rainfall was about 50% less in 1993. In contrast, soil disturbance increased giant foxtail and redroot pigweed emergence approximately 6- and 3-fold in 1992 and 1993, respectively. Seedling emergence associated with soil disturbance, relative to nondisturbed soil, increased seed bank depletion of common lambsquarters 16-fold in 1992, and giant foxtail and redroot pigweed and average of 6- and 3-fold in 1992 and 1993, respectively. These results indicated that soil disturbance increased seedling emergence and seed bank depletion of the predominant species in the weed community of a long-term, no-tillage system, but that this response was dependent on rainfall for common lambsquarters.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Soil disturbance increased common lambsquarters emergence 6-fold in 1992 relative to nondisturbed soil.
- Taxon
- common lambsquarters
Chenopodium albume0 - Treatment
- soil disturbancee0
- Outcome
- common lambsquarters emergencee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 6-folde0
- Comparator
- nondisturbed soile0
- Setting
- long-term, no-tillage corn cropping systeme1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil disturbance increased common lambsquarters emergence 6-fold in 1992 relative to nondisturbed soil, but did not influence emergence in 1993”
e1“long-term, no-tillage corn cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil disturbance did not change common lambsquarters emergence in 1993.
- Taxon
- common lambsquartersChenopodium albume0
- Treatment
- soil disturbancee0
- Outcome
- emergence in 1993e0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
- Comparator
- nondisturbed soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil disturbance increased common lambsquarters emergence 6-fold in 1992 relative to nondisturbed soil, but did not influence emergence in 1993”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil disturbance increased giant foxtail emergence approximately 6-fold in 1992 and 3-fold in 1993.
- Taxon
- giant foxtaile0
- Treatment
- soil disturbancee0
- Outcome
- emergencee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- approximately 6- and 3-folde0
- Qualifier
- in 1992 and 1993, respectivelye0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, soil disturbance increased giant foxtail and redroot pigweed emergence approximately 6- and 3-fold in 1992 and 1993, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil disturbance increased redroot pigweed emergence approximately 6-fold in 1992 and 3-fold in 1993.
- Taxon
- redroot pigweede0
- Treatment
- soil disturbancee0
- Outcome
- emergencee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- approximately 6- and 3-folde0
- Qualifier
- in 1992 and 1993, respectivelye0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, soil disturbance increased giant foxtail and redroot pigweed emergence approximately 6- and 3-fold in 1992 and 1993, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Common lambsquarters made up approximately 55% of the initial viable seed bank.
- Taxon
- common lambsquartersChenopodium albume0
- Outcome
- of the total viable seedse0
- Value
- approximately 55e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The seed bank was initially composed of common lambsquarters, redroot pigweed, and giant foxtail, with approximately 55, 36, and 8% of the total viable seeds, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Redroot pigweed made up approximately 36% of the initial viable seed bank.
Verbatim
e0“The seed bank was initially composed of common lambsquarters, redroot pigweed, and giant foxtail, with approximately 55, 36, and 8% of the total viable seeds, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Giant foxtail made up approximately 8% of the initial viable seed bank.
Verbatim
e0“The seed bank was initially composed of common lambsquarters, redroot pigweed, and giant foxtail, with approximately 55, 36, and 8% of the total viable seeds, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The level of seed aggregation was associated with seed density, and was greater at lower seed densities.
Verbatim
e0“the level of aggregation of viable seeds of a species was associated with seed density; at lower seed densities, the level of aggregation was greater”
e1“annual weed community”
Claim · model-written summary
Viable seeds of individual and total weed species were spatially aggregated.
Verbatim
e0“Three dispersion indices indicated that seeds of individual and total weed species were aggregated”
Claim · model-written summary
Seedling emergence associated with soil disturbance increased common lambsquarters seed bank depletion 16-fold in 1992 relative to nondisturbed soil.
- Taxon
- common lambsquartersChenopodium albume0
- Treatment
- soil disturbancee0
- Outcome
- seed bank depletione0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 16-folde0
- Comparator
- nondisturbed soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seedling emergence associated with soil disturbance, relative to nondisturbed soil, increased seed bank depletion of common lambsquarters 16-fold in 1992”
Claim · model-written summary
Seedling emergence associated with soil disturbance increased giant foxtail seed bank depletion approximately 6-fold in 1992 and 3-fold in 1993.
Verbatim
e0“Seedling emergence associated with soil disturbance, relative to nondisturbed soil, increased seed bank depletion of common lambsquarters 16-fold in 1992”
e1“and giant foxtail and redroot pigweed and average of 6- and 3-fold in 1992 and 1993, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Seedling emergence associated with soil disturbance increased redroot pigweed seed bank depletion approximately 6-fold in 1992 and 3-fold in 1993.
Verbatim
e0“Seedling emergence associated with soil disturbance, relative to nondisturbed soil, increased seed bank depletion of common lambsquarters 16-fold in 1992”
e1“and giant foxtail and redroot pigweed and average of 6- and 3-fold in 1992 and 1993, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The weed response to soil disturbance was dependent on rainfall for common lambsquarters.
- Taxon
- common lambsquartersChenopodium albume0
- Treatment
- rainfalle0
- Outcome
- this responsee0
- Qualifier
- dependent on rainfalle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“this response was dependent on rainfall for common lambsquarters”
The same questions in other papers
soil · growth · Chenopodium album (common lambsquarters)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
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.