Abstract
Core Ideas Yield, test weight, and returns over seed cost were greatest at early planting dates. Early planting optimized forage establishment and weed suppression in one site‐year. Increasing oat density increased yield in one site‐year, and test weight overall. Target oat density had no effect on returns over seed cost. Oat ( Avena sativa L.) is an important component of organic row crop rotations in the Upper Midwest. Our goal was to determine the effects of planting date and crop density on oat grain yield and yield components, test weight, straw yield, underseeded alfalfa and ambient weed biomass, and returns over seed cost. We conducted an experiment on certified organic farmland on an agricultural experiment station near Boone, IA, USA, over 2 yr. A randomized complete block split‐plot design was used to test effects of planting date (6, 17, and 28 Apr. 2015, 22 Mar. 2016, 4 and 15 Apr. 2016) as whole plot and target crop density (161, 236, 312, and 386 plants m –2 ) as subplot. Planting date had the greatest effect on response variables. Yields decreased by 33 and 9%, respectively, over 2015 and 2016 planting periods. Delayed planting decreased test weight in both site‐years. Alfalfa biomass decreased and weed biomass increased (as a function of delayed planting) in 2016, but had no effect in 2015. Increasing oat density had a positive linear effect on grain yield and test weight, and no effect on alfalfa biomass in both site‐years. Increasing oat density had a negative effect on weed biomass in 2016 and no effect in 2015. Returns over seed cost did not differ among our density treatments in both site‐years. Our results highlight potential no‐cost improvements that can be made to organic oat management to improve grain yield and quality, without negatively impacting forage establishment or weed suppression.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
In organic oat, yield decreased by 33% over the 2015 planting periods.
- Taxon
- Oat
Avena sativat0 - Treatment
- planting periodse1
- Outcome
- Yieldse1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Value
- 33e1
- Qualifier
- 2015e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Yields decreased by 33 and 9%, respectively, over 2015 and 2016 planting periods”
Claim · model-written summary
In organic oat, yield decreased by 9% over the 2016 planting periods.
- Taxon
- OatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- planting periodse1
- Outcome
- Yieldse1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Value
- 9%e1
- Qualifier
- 2016e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Yields decreased by 33 and 9%, respectively, over 2015 and 2016 planting periods”
Claim · model-written summary
Oat yield, test weight and returns over seed cost were greatest at early planting dates.
- Taxon
- OatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- early planting datese1
- Outcome
- Yield, test weight, and returns over seed coste1
- Direction
- greateste1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Yield, test weight, and returns over seed cost were greatest at early planting dates”
Claim · model-written summary
Delayed planting decreased oat test weight.
- Taxon
- OatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- Delayed plantinge1
- Outcome
- test weighte1
- Direction
- decreasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Delayed planting decreased test weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Underseeded alfalfa biomass decreased with delayed oat planting in 2016.
- Taxon
- OatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- delayed plantinge1
- Outcome
- Alfalfa biomasse1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Qualifier
- 2016e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Alfalfa biomass decreased and weed biomass increased (as a function of delayed planting) in 2016”
Claim · model-written summary
Ambient weed biomass increased with delayed oat planting in 2016.
- Taxon
- OatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- delayed plantinge1
- Interactor
- weede1weed
- Outcome
- weed biomasse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Qualifier
- 2016e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Alfalfa biomass decreased and weed biomass increased (as a function of delayed planting) in 2016”
Claim · model-written summary
Delayed planting had no effect on alfalfa and weed biomass in 2015.
- Taxon
- OatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- delayed plantinge1
- Interactor
- weede1weed
- Outcome
- weed biomasse1
- Direction
- no effecte1
- Qualifier
- 2015e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Alfalfa biomass decreased and weed biomass increased (as a function of delayed planting) in 2016, but had no effect in 2015”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing oat density had a positive linear effect on grain yield and test weight.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativae1
- Treatment
- Increasing oat densitye1
- Outcome
- grain yield and test weighte1
- Direction
- positive linear effecte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Increasing oat density had a positive linear effect on grain yield and test weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing oat density had no effect on alfalfa biomass.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativae1
- Treatment
- Increasing oat densitye1
- Outcome
- alfalfa biomasse1
- Direction
- no effecte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Increasing oat density had a positive linear effect on grain yield and test weight, and no effect on alfalfa biomass”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing oat density had a negative effect on weed biomass in 2016.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativae1
- Treatment
- Increasing oat densitye1
- Interactor
- weede1weed
- Outcome
- weed biomasse1
- Direction
- negative effecte1
- Qualifier
- 2016e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Increasing oat density had a negative effect on weed biomass in 2016 and no effect in 2015”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing oat density had no effect on weed biomass in 2015.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativae1
- Treatment
- Increasing oat densitye1
- Interactor
- weede1weed
- Outcome
- weed biomasse1
- Direction
- no effecte1
- Qualifier
- 2015e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Increasing oat density had a negative effect on weed biomass in 2016 and no effect in 2015”
Claim · model-written summary
Returns over seed cost did not differ among the oat density treatments.
- Taxon
- OatAvena sativat0
- Treatment
- density treatmentse1
- Outcome
- Returns over seed coste1
- Direction
- did not differe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Organic Oat Rotation Year”
e1“Returns over seed cost did not differ among our density treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that organic oat management can be improved at no cost to raise grain yield and quality without harming forage establishment or weed suppression.
- Taxon
- oatAvena sativae1
- Outcome
- grain yield and qualitye1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“improvements that can be made to organic oat management to improve grain yield and quality”
The same questions in other papers
sowing time · weed · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
sowing time · quality: grain · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →sowing time · growth · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.