Abstract
Two field experiments were carried out at El-Gemmeiza Agricultural Research Station Farm, Egypt, during 2017 and 2018 summer seasons to study the effect of soil water deficit and the planting method on maize plant under Middle Delta conditions of Egypt. Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD) did not significantly decrease chlorophyll content, dry matter (DM), leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), relative water content (RWC), osmotic potential (OP), ear length, ear diameter, rows per ear, kernels per row,100-kernel weight and grain yield. 50 % irrigation treatment decreased crop water productivity (CWP) by 9.93 % across the two seasons compared to irrigation at 80 % AVSMD. Irrigation at 80 % of AVSMD increased drought sensitivity (YR/ SD) and the drought susceptibility index (S) and CWP in both seasons. The reduction in WCU due to irrigation at 65 % of AVSMD reached 19.34 to 20.30 % and the improvement in CWP was 15.42 to 14.37 % compared to the irrigation at 50 % (control) in both seasons, respectively. Sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds and the distance between the hills was 25 cm (24000 plants per feddan) resulted in the highest chlorophyll content, DM, LAI, CGR, RWC, ear height, ear length, 100-kernel weight and grain yield in the two seasons, This treatment decreased YR/SD and S. Decreasing YR/SD and S. such decreases were accompanied with increasing CWP. It can be recommend that sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds, and the distance between hills 25 cm and irrigation at 65 % of AVSMD decreased WCU and improved CWP, in addition this treatment did not significantly decrease yield and its components and attained the lowest YR/S and S values.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 65% AVSMD did not significantly decrease chlorophyll content, dry matter or leaf area index of maize.
- Treatment
- Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD)e0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll content, dry matter (DM), leaf area index (LAI)e0
- Direction
- did not significantly decreasee0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD) did not significantly decrease chlorophyll content, dry matter (DM), leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), relative water content (RWC), osmotic potential (OP), ear length, ear diameter, rows per ear, kernels per row,100-kernel weight and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 65% AVSMD did not significantly decrease crop growth rate, relative water content or osmotic potential of maize.
- Treatment
- Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD)e0
- Outcome
- crop growth rate (CGR), relative water content (RWC), osmotic potential (OP)e0
- Direction
- did not significantly decreasee0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD) did not significantly decrease chlorophyll content, dry matter (DM), leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), relative water content (RWC), osmotic potential (OP), ear length, ear diameter, rows per ear, kernels per row,100-kernel weight and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 65% AVSMD did not significantly decrease ear length, ear diameter or rows per ear of maize.
- Treatment
- Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD)e0
- Outcome
- ear length, ear diameter, rows per eare0
- Direction
- did not significantly decreasee0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD) did not significantly decrease chlorophyll content, dry matter (DM), leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), relative water content (RWC), osmotic potential (OP), ear length, ear diameter, rows per ear, kernels per row,100-kernel weight and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 65% AVSMD did not significantly decrease kernels per row, 100-kernel weight or grain yield of maize.
- Treatment
- Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD)e0
- Outcome
- kernels per row,100-kernel weight and grain yielde0
- Direction
- did not significantly decreasee0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Irrigation at 65% available soil moisture depletion (AVSMD) did not significantly decrease chlorophyll content, dry matter (DM), leaf area index (LAI), crop growth rate (CGR), relative water content (RWC), osmotic potential (OP), ear length, ear diameter, rows per ear, kernels per row,100-kernel weight and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 50% decreased crop water productivity of maize by 9.93% across the two seasons compared with irrigation at 80% AVSMD.
- Treatment
- 50 % irrigation treatmente0
- Outcome
- crop water productivity (CWP)e0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 9.93 %e0
- Comparator
- irrigation at 80 % AVSMDe0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“50 % irrigation treatment decreased crop water productivity (CWP) by 9.93 % across the two seasons compared to irrigation at 80 % AVSMD”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 80% of AVSMD increased drought sensitivity, the drought susceptibility index and crop water productivity in both seasons.
- Treatment
- Irrigation at 80 % of AVSMDe0
- Outcome
- drought sensitivity (YR/ SD) and the drought susceptibility index (S) and CWPe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Irrigation at 80 % of AVSMD increased drought sensitivity (YR/ SD) and the drought susceptibility index (S) and CWP in both seasons”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 65% of AVSMD reduced WCU by 19.34 to 20.30% relative to irrigation at 50% (control) in both seasons.
- Treatment
- irrigation at 65 % of AVSMDe0
- Outcome
- WCUe0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 19.34 to 20.30 %e0
- Comparator
- irrigation at 50 % (control)e1
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“The reduction in WCU due to irrigation at 65 % of AVSMD reached 19.34 to 20.30 %”
e1“compared to the irrigation at 50 % (control)”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 65% of AVSMD improved crop water productivity by 15.42 to 14.37% relative to irrigation at 50% (control).
- Treatment
- irrigation at 65 % of AVSMDe1
- Outcome
- CWPe0
- Direction
- improvemente0
- Value
- 15.42 to 14.37 %e0
- Comparator
- irrigation at 50 % (control)e0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“the improvement in CWP was 15.42 to 14.37 % compared to the irrigation at 50 % (control)”
e1“The reduction in WCU due to irrigation at 65 % of AVSMD”
Claim · model-written summary
Sowing maize on beds 140 cm apart with hills 25 cm apart (24000 plants per feddan) gave the highest chlorophyll content, dry matter and leaf area index in the two seasons.
- Treatment
- Sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds and the distance between the hills was 25 cm (24000 plants per feddan)e0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll content, DM, LAIe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds and the distance between the hills was 25 cm (24000 plants per feddan) resulted in the highest chlorophyll content, DM, LAI, CGR, RWC, ear height, ear length, 100-kernel weight and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The same sowing pattern gave the highest crop growth rate, relative water content and ear height in the two seasons.
- Treatment
- Sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds and the distance between the hills was 25 cm (24000 plants per feddan)e0
- Outcome
- CGR, RWC, ear heighte0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds and the distance between the hills was 25 cm (24000 plants per feddan) resulted in the highest chlorophyll content, DM, LAI, CGR, RWC, ear height, ear length, 100-kernel weight and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The same sowing pattern gave the highest ear length, 100-kernel weight and grain yield in the two seasons.
- Treatment
- Sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds and the distance between the hills was 25 cm (24000 plants per feddan)e0
- Outcome
- ear length, 100-kernel weight and grain yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“Sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds and the distance between the hills was 25 cm (24000 plants per feddan) resulted in the highest chlorophyll content, DM, LAI, CGR, RWC, ear height, ear length, 100-kernel weight and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The bed sowing treatment decreased the drought sensitivity and drought susceptibility indices.
- Treatment
- This treatmente0
- Outcome
- YR/SD and Se0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Setting
- Middle Delta Conditions of Egyptt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“This treatment decreased YR/SD and S”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend sowing maize on beds 140 cm apart with hills 25 cm apart plus irrigation at 65% AVSMD, which decreased WCU and improved CWP.
- Outcome
- decreased WCU and improved CWPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize Plants under Middle Delta Conditions of Egypt”
e0“sowing maize plants on beds140 cm apart on both sides of beds, and the distance between hills 25 cm and irrigation at 65 % of AVSMD decreased WCU and improved CWP”
The same questions in other papers
soil water · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →soil water · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
38 papers more in this group
See all 42 papers →soil water · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 42 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
60 papers more in this group
See all 64 papers →irrigation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
80 papers in the same direction as this paper · 208 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- 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 →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
224 papers in the same direction as this paper · 791 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 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.