Abstract
Abstract Field research was done in two consecutive years to optimize deficit irrigation under different crop densities (low, medium, and high) using the ridge and furrow rainfall harvesting (RFRH) system. We demonstrate that applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages. MIF increased biomass by 10% and grain yield by 21%, thereby achieving a 17% increase in water use efficiency (WUE) and a 22% increase in precipitation use efficiency (PUE) compared with conventional flat planting (CK M ). MIF also improved irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) (9%) and irrigation water productivity (IWP) (46%) compared with no-irrigation under the RFRH system (MI 0 ). We observed that applying deficit irrigation (750 m 3 ha −1 ) at the bell and flowering stage (IBF) had positive effects on dry matter, leaf area, and evapotranspiration, but there were no significant increases in IWUE, IWP, WUE, biomass and grain yield compared with maize grown under IF at low, medium and high plant densities. The average net profit over the two years was 34% higher for MIF compared with the CK M treatment.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at flowering with medium density under RFRH increased maize biomass by 10% over conventional flat planting
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- biomasse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 10%e1
- Comparator
- conventional flat plantinge1
- Setting
- RFRH systeme0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
e1“MIF increased biomass by 10% and grain yield by 21%, thereby achieving a 17% increase in water use efficiency (WUE) and a 22% increase in precipitation use efficiency (PUE) compared with conventional flat planting (CK M )”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at flowering with medium density under RFRH increased maize grain yield by 21% over conventional flat planting
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 21%e1
- Comparator
- conventional flat plantinge1
- Setting
- RFRH systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
e1“MIF increased biomass by 10% and grain yield by 21%, thereby achieving a 17% increase in water use efficiency (WUE) and a 22% increase in precipitation use efficiency (PUE) compared with conventional flat planting (CK M )”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at flowering with medium density under RFRH increased water use efficiency by 17% over conventional flat planting
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- water use efficiency (WUE)e1
- Direction
- increasee1
- Value
- 17%e1
- Comparator
- conventional flat plantinge1
- Setting
- RFRH systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
e1“MIF increased biomass by 10% and grain yield by 21%, thereby achieving a 17% increase in water use efficiency (WUE) and a 22% increase in precipitation use efficiency (PUE) compared with conventional flat planting (CK M )”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at flowering with medium density under RFRH increased precipitation use efficiency by 22% over conventional flat planting
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- precipitation use efficiency (PUE)e1
- Direction
- increasee1
- Value
- 22%e1
- Comparator
- conventional flat plantinge1
- Setting
- RFRH systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
e1“MIF increased biomass by 10% and grain yield by 21%, thereby achieving a 17% increase in water use efficiency (WUE) and a 22% increase in precipitation use efficiency (PUE) compared with conventional flat planting (CK M )”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at flowering under RFRH improved irrigation water use efficiency by 9% over no irrigation
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE)e2
- Direction
- improvede2
- Value
- 9%e2
- Comparator
- no-irrigatione2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
e2“MIF also improved irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) (9%) and irrigation water productivity (IWP) (46%) compared with no-irrigation under the RFRH system (MI 0 )”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at flowering under RFRH improved irrigation water productivity by 46% over no irrigation
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- irrigation water productivity (IWP)e2
- Direction
- improvede2
- Value
- 46%e2
- Comparator
- no-irrigatione2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
e2“MIF also improved irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) (9%) and irrigation water productivity (IWP) (46%) compared with no-irrigation under the RFRH system (MI 0 )”
Claim · model-written summary
Average net profit over two years was 34% higher for MIF than for the CK M treatment
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- average net profit over the two yearse4
- Direction
- highere4
- Value
- 34%e4
- Comparator
- CK M treatmente4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
e4“The average net profit over the two years was 34% higher for MIF compared with the CK M treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at bell and flowering stage had positive effects on dry matter, leaf area and evapotranspiration compared with maize grown under IF
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (750 m 3 ha −1 ) at the bell and flowering stage (IBF)e3
- Outcome
- dry matter, leaf area, and evapotranspiratione3
- Direction
- increaseinferrede3
- Comparator
- maize grown under IFe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“We observed that applying deficit irrigation (750 m 3 ha −1 ) at the bell and flowering stage (IBF) had positive effects on dry matter, leaf area, and evapotranspiration, but there were no significant increases in IWUE, IWP, WUE, biomass and grain yield compared with maize grown under IF at low, medium and high plant densities”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at bell and flowering stage did not significantly increase IWUE, IWP or WUE compared with maize grown under IF
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (750 m 3 ha −1 ) at the bell and flowering stage (IBF)e3
- Outcome
- IWUE, IWP, WUEe3
- Direction
- no significant increasese3
- Comparator
- maize grown under IFe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“We observed that applying deficit irrigation (750 m 3 ha −1 ) at the bell and flowering stage (IBF) had positive effects on dry matter, leaf area, and evapotranspiration, but there were no significant increases in IWUE, IWP, WUE, biomass and grain yield compared with maize grown under IF at low, medium and high plant densities”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at bell and flowering stage did not significantly increase biomass or grain yield compared with maize grown under IF
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (750 m 3 ha −1 ) at the bell and flowering stage (IBF)e3
- Outcome
- biomass and grain yielde3
- Direction
- no significant increasese3
- Comparator
- maize grown under IFe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“We observed that applying deficit irrigation (750 m 3 ha −1 ) at the bell and flowering stage (IBF) had positive effects on dry matter, leaf area, and evapotranspiration, but there were no significant increases in IWUE, IWP, WUE, biomass and grain yield compared with maize grown under IF at low, medium and high plant densities”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation at flowering can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages
- Organ / stage
- bell, filling and flowering stagese0
- Treatment
- deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stagee0
- Outcome
- soil water storage (0–200 cm)e0
- Direction
- improvee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“applying deficit irrigation (375 m 3 ha −1 ) at the flowering stage of maize grown at medium density (M: 75000 plant ha −1 ) under the RFRH system (MIF) can improve soil water storage (0–200 cm) at the bell, filling and flowering stages”
The same questions in other papers
stage · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →stage · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →stage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →irrigation · nutrient: efficiency · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 papers →irrigation · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
55 papers more in this group
See all 59 papers →stage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 55 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
94 papers more in this group
See all 98 papers →irrigation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
207 papers in the same direction as this paper · 80 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
285 papers more in this group
See all 289 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
283 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
320 papers more in this group
See all 324 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.