Abstract
During three years (2007, 2008 and 2009), multidisciplinary stationary research of reduced soil tillage and nitrogen fertilization was conducted for soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], on Gley soil type of Croatian Baranya region. Research was carried out with four soil tillage treatments and three nitrogen fertilization level, set up as split-plot design in four repetitions. Tillage treatments (TT) were: CT- conventional tillage (autumn plowing 30 cm), DT- multiple disk-harrowing (autumn disk-harrowing 10-12 cm), LT- chiselling and disk-harrowing (autumn soil loosening 30 cm), NT- no-tillage. Nitrogen fertilization treatment (NF) for soybean was NF-1 = 35, NF-2 = 70, NF-3 = 110 kg N/ha. Weather conditions during the study were adverse with considerable aberrations, respectively significantly different from long-term mean. Thus, 2007 was extremely dry, 2008 was moderately humid and 2009 dry. Significant differences of soil water content (SWC) were identified in all years of research: NT had higher SWC in 2007 and 2008, while DT had hogher SWC in 2009 compared to CT. The yield was negatively statistically significant correlated with bulk density (BD), i.e. with increase of compaction yield decreased. Significant differences among years were recorded regarding soybean grain yield, whereas soil tillage systems showed following decreasing order, on average: CT (2.59 t/ha) > LT (2.46 t/ha) > NT (2.46 t/ha) > DT (2.41 t/ha). Nitrogen fertilization on average did not influence soybean yield. On average, compared to CT, only DT had significantly lower soybean grain yield. The study showed a very successful application of reduced soil tillage systems in soybean production with the optimal nitrogen fertilization.
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
No-tillage had higher soil water content than conventional tillage in 2007 and 2008.
- Taxon
- Soybean
Glycine maxt0 - Treatment
- NTe0
- Outcome
- SWCe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- in 2007 and 2008e0
- Comparator
- CTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NT had higher SWC in 2007 and 2008, while DT had hogher SWC in 2009 compared to CT.”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Disk harrowing had higher soil water content than conventional tillage in 2009.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NT had higher SWC in 2007 and 2008, while DT had hogher SWC in 2009 compared to CT.”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean yield declined with increasing soil bulk density.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- compactione0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield was negatively statistically significant correlated with bulk density (BD), i.e. with increase of compaction yield decreased.”
t0“Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean grain yield differed significantly between years.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Outcome
- soybean grain yielde0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant differences among years were recorded regarding soybean grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage averaged 2.59 t/ha soybean yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CT (2.59 t/ha) > LT (2.46 t/ha) > NT (2.46 t/ha) > DT (2.41 t/ha)”
t0“Soybean”
t1“regarding soybean grain yield, whereas soil tillage systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Loosening tillage averaged 2.46 t/ha soybean yield.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- LTe0
- Outcome
- soybean grain yieldt1
- Value
- 2.46 t/hae0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CT (2.59 t/ha) > LT (2.46 t/ha) > NT (2.46 t/ha) > DT (2.41 t/ha)”
t0“Soybean”
t1“regarding soybean grain yield, whereas soil tillage systems”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage averaged 2.46 t/ha soybean yield.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- NTe0
- Outcome
- soybean grain yieldt1
- Value
- 2.46 t/hae0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CT (2.59 t/ha) > LT (2.46 t/ha) > NT (2.46 t/ha) > DT (2.41 t/ha)”
t0“Soybean”
t1“regarding soybean grain yield, whereas soil tillage systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Disk harrowing averaged 2.41 t/ha soybean yield.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- DTe0
- Outcome
- soybean grain yieldt1
- Value
- 2.41 t/hae0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CT (2.59 t/ha) > LT (2.46 t/ha) > NT (2.46 t/ha) > DT (2.41 t/ha)”
t0“Soybean”
t1“regarding soybean grain yield, whereas soil tillage systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen fertilization did not influence average soybean yield.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- Nitrogen fertilizatione0
- Outcome
- soybean yielde0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Nitrogen fertilization on average did not influence soybean yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Only disk harrowing significantly lowered soybean grain yield relative to conventional tillage.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On average, compared to CT, only DT had significantly lower soybean grain yield.”
t0“Soybean”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
170 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,021 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,188 papers more in this group
See all 1,192 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.