Abstract
Core Ideas Aggregation and time‐to‐pond were improved under conservation agriculture. Conventional practice had a higher sorptivity rate than conservation agriculture. Maize yields were similar for conservation agriculture and conventional practice in the first year of production. Maize yields were less in conservation agriculture than in conventional practice in the second year due to patchy plant stands in conservation agriculture. There were no differences in yield between conservation agriculture and conventional practice for rapeseed or wheat. Conservation agriculture (CA) is a management system characterized by zero or minimum tillage, permanent soil cover with crop residue or plant growth, and crop rotation. This study investigated the impact of conservation tillage, crop type, and planting date on crop productivity and the soil physical properties for 2 yr following conversion to CA. After 2 yr, average mean weight diameter of dry aggregates for the 0‐ to 5‐cm and 5‐ to 10‐cm soil depths were 45 and 24% greater in the CA treatment than the conventional practice (CP) treatment, respectively. However, soil sorptivity was about three times slower in CA than in CP for rapeseed ( Brassica napus L. toria ) rotation treatments, but only 62% slower in CA than CP for wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) rotation treatments. Soil bulk density to a depth of 15 cm was greater in CA (1.30 g cm −3 ) than CP (1.24 g cm −3 ), but only for late‐planted treatments. Maize ( Zea mays L.) yields for CA were not different from CP in the first year, but were 1.4 Mg ha −1 for CA and 5.0 Mg ha −1 for CP in the second year due to poor stand establishment under CA. There were no effects of CA on dry‐season rapeseed and wheat. Results suggest that during the transition of CP to CA, soil physical properties can be improved but yields may remain constant or decline. Achieving equivalent yield outcomes between CA and CP will largely depend on equivalent stand establishment.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture increased dry aggregate diameter at 0 to 5 cm by 45%.
- Treatment
- CA treatmente0
- Outcome
- mean weight diameter of dry aggregatese0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 45e0
- Qualifier
- 0‐ to 5‐cme0
- Comparator
- conventional practice (CP) treatmente0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“average mean weight diameter of dry aggregates for the 0‐ to 5‐cm and 5‐ to 10‐cm soil depths were 45 and 24% greater in the CA treatment than the conventional practice (CP) treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture increased dry aggregate diameter at 5 to 10 cm by 24%.
- Treatment
- CA treatmente0
- Outcome
- mean weight diameter of dry aggregatese0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 24%e0
- Qualifier
- 5‐ to 10‐cme0
- Comparator
- conventional practice (CP) treatmente0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“average mean weight diameter of dry aggregates for the 0‐ to 5‐cm and 5‐ to 10‐cm soil depths were 45 and 24% greater in the CA treatment than the conventional practice (CP) treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil sorptivity in the rapeseed rotation was about three times slower under CA.
Verbatim
e0“soil sorptivity was about three times slower in CA than in CP for rapeseed ( Brassica napus L. toria ) rotation treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil sorptivity in the wheat rotation was 62% slower under CA.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- CAe0
- Outcome
- soil sorptivitye0
- Direction
- slowere0
- Value
- 62%e0
- Comparator
- CPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“soil sorptivity was about three times slower in CA than in CP for rapeseed ( Brassica napus L. toria ) rotation treatments, but only 62% slower in CA than CP for wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) rotation treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
For late-planted treatments, soil bulk density was greater under CA than CP.
- Treatment
- CAe0
- Outcome
- Soil bulk densitye0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 1.30 g cm −3e0
- Qualifier
- late‐planted treatmentse0
- Comparator
- CPe0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Soil bulk density to a depth of 15 cm was greater in CA (1.30 g cm −3 ) than CP (1.24 g cm −3 ), but only for late‐planted treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
First-year maize yields under CA did not differ from CP.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize ( Zea mays L.) yields for CA were not different from CP in the first year”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-year maize yield was 1.4 Mg ha −1 under CA versus 5.0 Mg ha −1 under CP, attributed to poor stands.
- Treatment
- CAe0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- poor stand establishmente0
- Value
- 1.4 Mg ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- 5.0 Mg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- CPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize ( Zea mays L.) yields for CA were not different from CP in the first year, but were 1.4 Mg ha −1 for CA and 5.0 Mg ha −1 for CP in the second year due to poor stand establishment under CA”
Claim · model-written summary
CA had no reported effect on dry-season rapeseed.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“There were no effects of CA on dry‐season rapeseed and wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
CA had no reported effect on dry-season wheat.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- CAe0
- Outcome
- no effectse0
- Direction
- no effectse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There were no effects of CA on dry‐season rapeseed and wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Equivalent stand establishment was considered necessary for equivalent yields during conversion to CA.
- Outcome
- equivalent stand establishmente0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Achieving equivalent yield outcomes between CA and CP will largely depend on equivalent stand establishment”
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.