Abstract
Conservation tillage systems that leave greater crop residue on the soil surface to reduce wind and water erosion are becoming more popular with Iowa farmers. Conservation-tilled soils, however, tend to be wetter and cooler at planting time than conventional fall plowed soils. Our objective was to compare corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids classified as cold or not cold tolerant (based on laboratory germination tests) on soils that were either fall plowed (conventional tillage) or spring disked (conservation tillage). Our results did not show any clear advantage for using conventional instead of conservation tillage. Means for the hybrids classified as cold tolerant and not cold tolerant were similar for both tillage systems. No consistent differences in stand, yield, and grain moisture were found between the two tillage systems which suggested that comparable performance would be expected for the two methods of tillage.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage showed no clear advantage over conservation tillage for corn hybrids.
- Treatment
- conventional instead of conservation tillagee1
- Outcome
- clear advantagee1
- Comparator
- conservation tillagee1
Zea maysNot reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“to compare corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids classified as cold or not cold tolerant”
e1“Our results did not show any clear advantage for using conventional instead of conservation tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Cold-tolerant and not-cold-tolerant corn hybrids had similar means under both tillage systems.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“to compare corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids classified as cold or not cold tolerant”
e2“Means for the hybrids classified as cold tolerant and not cold tolerant were similar for both tillage systems”
Claim · model-written summary
No consistent differences in stand, yield, or grain moisture were found between the two tillage systems.
- Treatment
- the two tillage systemse3
- Outcome
- stand, yield, and grain moisturee3
- Direction
- No consistent differencese3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“to compare corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids classified as cold or not cold tolerant”
e3“No consistent differences in stand, yield, and grain moisture were found between the two tillage systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Comparable corn performance would be expected under either tillage method.
- Outcome
- comparable performancee4
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“to compare corn (Zea mays L.) hybrids classified as cold or not cold tolerant”
e4“which suggested that comparable performance would be expected for the two methods of tillage”
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 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.