Abstract
In Europe, the framework for sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) production was subject to considerable changes and for the future it is expected that sugar beet cultivation might concentrate around the sugar factories for economic reasons. Based on data from a national sugar beet farmers’ survey and multi-year crop rotation trials, the effects of cropping interval (number of years in between two subsequent sugar beet crops) and of preceding crops on sugar yield were elucidated under current Central European management conditions. The dominating sugar beet cropping interval was ≥4 years in the farm survey with pronounced differences between regions. However, the cropping intervals 2, 3 and ≥4 years did not affect the sugar yield. Therefore, significant differences in sugar yield between regions were assumed to be caused by multiple interactions between year, site and farmers’ skills. Throughout Germany, the dominating preceding crops in sugar beet cultivation were winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and winter barley (Hordeum vulgare L.). In the field trials, the sugar yield was 5% higher after pea (Pisum sativum L.) compared to maize (Zea mais L.) as preceding crop, while differences between the preceding crops pea and winter wheat, and wheat and maize were not significant. Repeated measurements of canopy development and leaf color during the growing season revealed a higher N-availability after pea as preceding crop. However, decreased growth after maize was not completely compensated for by high N-fertilizer doses. Overall, the causes for the differences in sugar yield between the preceding crops remained open. The results do not support concerns about substantial yield losses in sugar beet production due to a reduction in the cropping interval from 3 to 2 years. Nevertheless, short rotations with maize and sugar beet might increase the risk of Rhizoctonia solani crown and root rot infestation. Leguminous crops such as pea offer the potential for higher sugar beet yield with lower N-fertilizer doses.
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
The dominant beet cropping interval was at least four years and varied by region.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0 - Outcome
- cropping intervale0
- Value
- ≥4 yearse0
- Setting
- regionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“The dominating sugar beet cropping interval was ≥4 years in the farm survey with pronounced differences between regions.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cropping intervals of two, three and at least four years did not affect sugar yield.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- cropping intervals 2, 3 and ≥4 yearse0
- Outcome
- sugar yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“the cropping intervals 2, 3 and ≥4 years did not affect the sugar yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Winter wheat and winter barley were the predominant preceding crops across Germany.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- dominating preceding cropse0
- Setting
- Germanye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“Throughout Germany, the dominating preceding crops in sugar beet cultivation were winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and winter barley (Hordeum vulgare L.).”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugar beet yielded 5% more after pea than after maize.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- pea (Pisum sativum L.)e0
- Outcome
- sugar yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5%e0
- Comparator
- maize (Zea mais L.)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“the sugar yield was 5% higher after pea (Pisum sativum L.) compared to maize (Zea mais L.) as preceding crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugar yield did not differ significantly between pea and winter wheat preceding crops.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- peae0
- Outcome
- differencese0
- Comparator
- winter wheate0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“differences between the preceding crops pea and winter wheat, and wheat and maize were not significant”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugar yield did not differ significantly between wheat and maize preceding crops.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- wheate0
- Outcome
- differencese0
- Comparator
- maizee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“differences between the preceding crops pea and winter wheat, and wheat and maize were not significant”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen availability was higher after pea.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- peae0
- Outcome
- N-availabilitye0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“Repeated measurements of canopy development and leaf color during the growing season revealed a higher N-availability after pea as preceding crop.”
Claim · model-written summary
High nitrogen fertilizer doses did not fully compensate for reduced growth after maize.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- high N-fertilizer dosese0
- Outcome
- growth after maizee0
- Direction
- not completely compensatede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“decreased growth after maize was not completely compensated for by high N-fertilizer doses.”
Claim · model-written summary
The findings do not support major yield loss from reducing rotation interval from three to two years.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- reduction in the cropping interval from 3 to 2 yearse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“The results do not support concerns about substantial yield losses in sugar beet production due to a reduction in the cropping interval from 3 to 2 years.”
Claim · model-written summary
Short maize and sugar beet rotations might increase Rhizoctonia root rot risk.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia solani
Rhizoctonia solanie0pathogen - Outcome
- risk of Rhizoctonia solani crown and root rot infestatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“short rotations with maize and sugar beet might increase the risk of Rhizoctonia solani crown and root rot infestation.”
Claim · model-written summary
Pea preceding crops may allow higher beet yield at lower nitrogen fertilizer doses.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- higher sugar beet yield with lower N-fertilizer dosese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.)”
e0“Leguminous crops such as pea offer the potential for higher sugar beet yield with lower N-fertilizer doses.”
The same questions in other papers
nitrogen · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 97 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
104 papers more in this group
See all 108 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.