Abstract
Cultivar of maize zhengdan958 was chose to work as experimental materials in this study.The results show that yield of maize under width lines(WL) were more about 15.87%,16.54% and 9.87% than no tillage(NT),plough tillage(PT) and conventional tillage(CT),moreover,there was no significance about 100 seeds weight among different tillage methods).Photosynthetic traits of maize leaves under WL were more than other tillage methods,and net photosynthetic rate under WL was improved by 30.73%,14.79% and 10.71% compared to NT,PT and CT.Mean-while,water use efficiency of leaves was improved well under width lines.Chlorophyll content,specific weight,soluble sugar and soluble of maize leaves were higher than other tillage methods significantly,MDA content of maize leaves under no tillage was most among different tillage methods,meanwhile,relationship between yield and some physiolog-ical traits were effected by different tillage methods.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Wide-line maize yielded 15.87% more than no tillage.
- Treatment
- width lines(WL)e0
- Outcome
- yield of maizee0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 15.87%e0
- Comparator
- no tillage(NT)e0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“maize leaves”
e0“yield of maize under width lines(WL) were more about 15.87%,16.54% and 9.87% than no tillage(NT),plough tillage(PT) and conventional tillage(CT)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide-line maize yielded 16.54% more than plough tillage.
- Treatment
- width lines(WL)e0
- Outcome
- yield of maizee0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 16.54%e0
- Comparator
- plough tillage(PT)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield of maize under width lines(WL) were more about 15.87%,16.54% and 9.87% than no tillage(NT),plough tillage(PT) and conventional tillage(CT)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide-line maize yielded 9.87% more than conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- width lines(WL)e0
- Outcome
- yield of maizee0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 9.87%e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage(CT)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield of maize under width lines(WL) were more about 15.87%,16.54% and 9.87% than no tillage(NT),plough tillage(PT) and conventional tillage(CT)”
Claim · model-written summary
Hundred-seed weight did not differ significantly among tillage methods.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significance about 100 seeds weight among different tillage methods”
t0“maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide-line maize had higher photosynthetic traits than other tillage methods.
- Treatment
- WLe0
- Outcome
- Photosynthetic traits of maize leavese0
- Direction
- moree0
- Comparator
- other tillage methodse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Photosynthetic traits of maize leaves under WL were more than other tillage methods”
Claim · model-written summary
Net photosynthetic rate with wide lines was 30.73% greater than no tillage.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“net photosynthetic rate under WL was improved by 30.73%,14.79% and 10.71% compared to NT,PT and CT”
t0“maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Net photosynthetic rate with wide lines was 14.79% greater than plough tillage.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“net photosynthetic rate under WL was improved by 30.73%,14.79% and 10.71% compared to NT,PT and CT”
t0“maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Net photosynthetic rate with wide lines was 10.71% greater than conventional tillage.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“net photosynthetic rate under WL was improved by 30.73%,14.79% and 10.71% compared to NT,PT and CT”
t0“maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide lines improved leaf water-use efficiency.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water use efficiency of leaves was improved well under width lines”
t0“maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Wide lines significantly increased leaf chlorophyll content, specific weight and soluble sugar versus other tillage methods.
- Outcome
- Chlorophyll content,specific weight,soluble sugare0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- other tillage methodse0
Not reportedTreatment
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Chlorophyll content,specific weight,soluble sugar and soluble of maize leaves were higher than other tillage methods significantly”
t0“maize leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
No tillage produced the highest maize leaf MDA content.
- Treatment
- no tillagee0
- Outcome
- MDA content of maize leavese0
- Direction
- moste0
- Comparator
- different tillage methodse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“MDA content of maize leaves under no tillage was most among different tillage methods”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage methods altered the relationship between maize yield and physiological traits.
- Treatment
- different tillage methodse0
- Outcome
- relationship between yield and some physiolog-ical traitse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“relationship between yield and some physiolog-ical traits were effected by different tillage methods”
t0“maize leaves”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · physiology: oxidative · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- 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.