Abstract
The magnitude of yield reduction due to soil compaction is variable and depends on the soil type, fertility status and other soil and environmental factors. The present investigation was carried out at the research farm, Department of Soil Science, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. The experiment was conducted to evaluate the effect of different levels of subsoil compaction and nitrogen fertilization on maize phenology, yield and heat use efficiency. The C2 (subsoil bulk density (Db)= >1.8 Mg m-3) treatment reduced yield by 15.5 and 24.3 % and heat use efficiency (HUE) by 15.2 and 20.9 % than that in C0 (subsoil Db=1.55-1.65 Mg m-3) treatment during the year 2012 and 2013, respectively. The tasseling and silking stage was delayed, while physiological maturity was advanced under C2 subsoil compaction treatment than that in C0 treatment. The N2 treatment improved the yield by 14.9 and 13.9 % and HUE by 15.2 and 14.3 % than that in N0 treatment during the year 2012 and 2013, respectively. Maize took more days to reach physiological maturity under N2 treatment as compared to N0 treatment. Phenothermal index (PTI) showed that crop reached different stages earlier under C1 and C2 than that of C0. The data emphasized the need to take care of soil strength and soil temperature related parameters along with weather conditions for better yield prediction using thermal time.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
C2 compaction reduced maize yield by 15.5% in 2012 and 24.3% in 2013 relative to C0.
- Treatment
- C2 (subsoil bulk density (Db)= >1.8 Mg m-3)e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 15.5 and 24.3 %e0
- Comparator
- C0 (subsoil Db=1.55-1.65 Mg m-3)e0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The C2 (subsoil bulk density (Db)= >1.8 Mg m-3) treatment reduced yield by 15.5 and 24.3 % and heat use efficiency (HUE) by 15.2 and 20.9 % than that in C0 (subsoil Db=1.55-1.65 Mg m-3) treatment during the year 2012 and 2013, respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
C2 compaction reduced maize heat use efficiency by 15.2% in 2012 and 20.9% in 2013 relative to C0.
- Treatment
- C2 (subsoil bulk density (Db)= >1.8 Mg m-3)e0
- Outcome
- heat use efficiency (HUE)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 15.2 and 20.9 %e0
- Comparator
- C0 (subsoil Db=1.55-1.65 Mg m-3)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The C2 (subsoil bulk density (Db)= >1.8 Mg m-3) treatment reduced yield by 15.5 and 24.3 % and heat use efficiency (HUE) by 15.2 and 20.9 % than that in C0 (subsoil Db=1.55-1.65 Mg m-3) treatment during the year 2012 and 2013, respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
C2 compaction delayed maize tasseling and silking relative to C0.
- Treatment
- C2 subsoil compaction treatmente0
- Outcome
- tasseling and silking stagee0
- Direction
- delayede0
- Comparator
- C0 treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The tasseling and silking stage was delayed, while physiological maturity was advanced under C2 subsoil compaction treatment than that in C0 treatment.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
C2 compaction advanced maize physiological maturity relative to C0.
- Treatment
- C2 subsoil compaction treatmente0
- Outcome
- physiological maturitye0
- Direction
- advancede0
- Comparator
- C0 treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The tasseling and silking stage was delayed, while physiological maturity was advanced under C2 subsoil compaction treatment than that in C0 treatment.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
N2 improved maize yield by 14.9% in 2012 and 13.9% in 2013 relative to N0.
- Treatment
- N2 treatmente0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 14.9 and 13.9 %e0
- Comparator
- N0 treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The N2 treatment improved the yield by 14.9 and 13.9 % and HUE by 15.2 and 14.3 % than that in N0 treatment during the year 2012 and 2013, respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
N2 improved maize heat use efficiency by 15.2% in 2012 and 14.3% in 2013 relative to N0.
- Treatment
- N2 treatmente0
- Outcome
- HUEe0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 15.2 and 14.3 %e0
- Comparator
- N0 treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The N2 treatment improved the yield by 14.9 and 13.9 % and HUE by 15.2 and 14.3 % than that in N0 treatment during the year 2012 and 2013, respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
N2 maize took more days to reach physiological maturity than N0 maize.
- Treatment
- N2 treatmente0
- Outcome
- days to reach physiological maturitye0
- Direction
- moree0
- Comparator
- N0 treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize took more days to reach physiological maturity under N2 treatment as compared to N0 treatment.”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize reached different stages earlier under C1 and C2 than C0 according to PTI.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Phenothermal index (PTI) showed that crop reached different stages earlier under C1 and C2 than that of C0.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend accounting for soil strength, soil temperature and weather in thermal-time yield prediction.
- Outcome
- take care of soil strength and soil temperature related parameters along with weather conditions for better yield prediction using thermal timee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The data emphasized the need to take care of soil strength and soil temperature related parameters along with weather conditions for better yield prediction using thermal time.”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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
- negative
- 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.