Abstract
Abstract Low-fertile sod-podzolic soils of Chuvashia studied the influence of traditional, minimal and zero tillage on the yield and quality of corn grain. Traditional technology of maize cultivation for grain included disc discarding of stubble of spring wheat to a depth of 4–6 cm, peeling, dumping of plow for 20–22 cm, pre-sowing cultivation for 4–6 cm with simultaneous harrowing, sowing and packing. The system with minimal soil cultivation was based on autumn disking and stubble sinking to a depth of 6–10 cm, spring pre-sowing cultivation for 8– 10 cm and sowing with the Amazone seed drill. At no-till processing in the autumn period, the herbicide was sprayed with a continuous Zero action and a direct sowing of maize by the Amazone complex in the spring. Research conducted on a highly efficient hybrid of the ROSS 199 MV universal direction showed the advantages of no-till of the ground before the minimal and traditional technologies. The coefficient of energy efficiency in this case was 2.11 (with the traditional - 2.02, with the minimum - 2.10), and the profitability level increased by 3.6 and 1.5% compared to traditional and minimal tillage. Biochemical analysis revealed that the corn grain at zero processing is not inferior in quality to the control variant. In all variants of the experiment, 1 kg of grain corresponded to 1.42 feed units and 13.01-13.05 MJ of exchange energy.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
No-till gave a higher energy efficiency coefficient (2.11) than traditional tillage (2.02) for corn.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse1 - Material
- ROSS 199 MVe2
- Treatment
- no-tille4
- Outcome
- coefficient of energy efficiencye3
- Direction
- higherinferrede3
- Value
- 2.11e3
- Qualifier
- 2.02e3
- Comparator
- traditionale3
- Setting
- Chuvashiae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Low-fertile sod-podzolic soils of Chuvashia”
e1“yield and quality of corn grain”
e2“Research conducted on a highly efficient hybrid of the ROSS 199 MV universal direction”
e3“The coefficient of energy efficiency in this case was 2.11 (with the traditional - 2.02, with the minimum - 2.10)”
e4“At no-till processing in the autumn period”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till gave a higher energy efficiency coefficient (2.11) than minimum tillage (2.10) for corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Material
- ROSS 199 MVe2
- Treatment
- no-tille4
- Outcome
- coefficient of energy efficiencye3
- Direction
- higherinferrede3
- Value
- 2.11e3
- Qualifier
- 2.10e3
- Comparator
- minimume3
- Setting
- Chuvashiae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Low-fertile sod-podzolic soils of Chuvashia”
e1“yield and quality of corn grain”
e2“Research conducted on a highly efficient hybrid of the ROSS 199 MV universal direction”
e3“The coefficient of energy efficiency in this case was 2.11 (with the traditional - 2.02, with the minimum - 2.10)”
e4“At no-till processing in the autumn period”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till increased profitability by 3.6 relative to traditional tillage for corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- no-tille4
- Outcome
- profitability levele5
- Direction
- increasede5
- Value
- 3.6e5
- Comparator
- traditionale5
- Setting
- Chuvashiae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Low-fertile sod-podzolic soils of Chuvashia”
e1“yield and quality of corn grain”
e4“At no-till processing in the autumn period”
e5“the profitability level increased by 3.6 and 1.5% compared to traditional and minimal tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till increased profitability by 1.5% relative to minimal tillage for corn.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Treatment
- no-tille4
- Outcome
- profitability levele5
- Direction
- increasede5
- Value
- 1.5%e5
- Comparator
- minimal tillagee5
- Setting
- Chuvashiae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Low-fertile sod-podzolic soils of Chuvashia”
e1“yield and quality of corn grain”
e4“At no-till processing in the autumn period”
e5“the profitability level increased by 3.6 and 1.5% compared to traditional and minimal tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain quality of corn at zero processing is not inferior to the control variant.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse6
- Organ / stage
- graine6
- Treatment
- zero processinge6
- Outcome
- qualitye6
- Direction
- not inferiore6
- Comparator
- control variante6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“Biochemical analysis revealed that the corn grain at zero processing is not inferior in quality to the control variant”
Claim · model-written summary
One kilogram of corn grain corresponded to 1.42 feed units.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Organ / stage
- graine7
- Outcome
- feed unitse7
- Value
- 1.42e7
- Qualifier
- In all variants of the experimente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“yield and quality of corn grain”
e7“In all variants of the experiment, 1 kg of grain corresponded to 1.42 feed units and 13.01-13.05 MJ of exchange energy”
Claim · model-written summary
One kilogram of corn grain corresponded to 13.01-13.05 MJ of exchange energy.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse1
- Organ / stage
- graine7
- Outcome
- exchange energye7
- Value
- 13.01-13.05 MJe7
- Qualifier
- In all variants of the experimente7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“yield and quality of corn grain”
e7“In all variants of the experiment, 1 kg of grain corresponded to 1.42 feed units and 13.01-13.05 MJ of exchange energy”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
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.