Paper · 2022 · Alexandria Science Exchange Journal

Enhancement of Wheat Productivity Under Different Levels of Tillage, Seeding Rate and Nitrogen Sources in An Arid Region

Ahmed Shaalan; Samer Amer; Hassan Khalil

6
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

A two year field experiment was conducted during the winter season of 2018/2019 and 2019/2020, to evaluate grain yield and some agronomic traits of the Egyptian local wheat cultivar (Shandaweel 1) under three tillage practices; conventional (CT), partial (PT) and zero tillage (ZT), three nitrogen fertilizer treatments (180 kg mineral N ha-1 (N1), 144 kg N ha-1 + humic acid (N2) and 108 kg N ha-1 + humic acid + halex (N3) as well as three seeding rates (95 (S1), 119 (S2) and 143 (S3) kg ha-1). Conservation tillage practices showed significantly higher yield or at least equal to partial tillage, highlighting 1.6 ton ha-1 increase over conventional tillage in 2019 season, emphasizing the suitability of conservation tillage for agriculture in arid regions. Averaged over the two growing seasons, the non-significant 0.6 ton ha-1 difference in yield between N1 and N3 suggests the replacement of part of the mineral nitrogen fertilizer with more environmentally friendly forms without yield penalty. The intermediate seeding rate offered an adequate balance between resources and number of plants/unit area, thus minimizing competition and outperforming the lowest and highest seeding rate with a 0.5-0.7 ton ha-1 over the two growing seasons.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation tillage (partial or zero tillage) gave significantly higher wheat yield than partial tillage, or at least equal yield.

Material
Shandaweel 1e1
Treatment
Conservation tillagee2
Outcome
yielde2
Direction
highere2
Qualifier
or at least equale2
Comparator
partial tillagee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Egyptian local wheat cultivar (Shandaweel 1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–196 · show in text ↑
e2

“Conservation tillage practices showed significantly higher yield or at least equal to partial tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 498–599 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation tillage increased wheat yield by 1.6 ton/ha over conventional tillage in the 2019 season.

Treatment
Conservation tillagee3
Outcome
yielde3
Direction
increasee3
Value
1.6 ton ha-1e3
Qualifier
2019 seasone3
Comparator
conventional tillagee3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Egyptian local wheat cultivar (Shandaweel 1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–196 · show in text ↑
e3

“Conservation tillage practices showed significantly higher yield or at least equal to partial tillage, highlighting 1.6 ton ha-1 increase over conventional tillage in 2019 season”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 498–676 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Averaged over two seasons, the 0.6 ton/ha yield difference between the N3 and N1 nitrogen treatments was non-significant.

Treatment
108 kg N ha-1 + humic acid + halexe5
Outcome
yielde4
Direction
no_changeinferrede4
Value
0.6 ton ha-1e4
Qualifier
Averaged over the two growing seasonse4
Comparator
180 kg mineral N ha-1e6

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Egyptian local wheat cultivar (Shandaweel 1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–196 · show in text ↑
e4

“Averaged over the two growing seasons, the non-significant 0.6 ton ha-1 difference in yield between N1 and N3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 763–872 · show in text ↑
e5

“108 kg N ha-1 + humic acid + halex (N3)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 385–424 · show in text ↑
e6

“180 kg mineral N ha-1 (N1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 321–347 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Replacing part of the mineral nitrogen fertilizer with more environmentally friendly forms is suggested to carry no yield penalty in wheat.

Outcome
replacement of part of the mineral nitrogen fertilizere7
Qualifier
without yield penaltye7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Egyptian local wheat cultivar (Shandaweel 1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–196 · show in text ↑
e7

“suggests the replacement of part of the mineral nitrogen fertilizer with more environmentally friendly forms without yield penalty”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–1003 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The intermediate seeding rate outperformed the lowest and highest seeding rates by 0.5-0.7 ton/ha in grain yield over two seasons.

Treatment
intermediate seeding ratee3
Outcome
grain yielde2
Direction
outperforminge4
Value
0.5-0.7 ton ha-1e4
Qualifier
over the two growing seasonse4
Comparator
lowest and highest seeding ratee4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Egyptian local wheat cultivar (Shandaweel 1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–196 · show in text ↑
e2

“to evaluate grain yield and some agronomic traits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 95–144 · show in text ↑
e3

“The intermediate seeding rate offered an adequate balance between resources and number of plants/unit area”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1005–1111 · show in text ↑
e4

“outperforming the lowest and highest seeding rate with a 0.5-0.7 ton ha-1 over the two growing seasons”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1145–1247 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors suggest conservation tillage is suitable for wheat agriculture in arid regions.

Outcome
suitability of conservation tillagee2
Setting
arid regionse2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Egyptian local wheat cultivar (Shandaweel 1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 152–196 · show in text ↑
e2

“emphasizing the suitability of conservation tillage for agriculture in arid regions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 678–761 · show in text ↑

other · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

223 papers: 206 positive, 17 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 206 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

219 papers more in this group

See all 223 papers →

density · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

498 papers: 376 positive, 122 negative or no effect

375 papers in the same direction as this paper · 115 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

494 papers more in this group

See all 498 papers →

tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

1,414 papers: 1,116 positive, 298 negative or no effect

1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1,410 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 papers →

nitrogen · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

2,061 papers: 1,737 positive, 324 negative or no effect

323 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,737 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

2,057 papers more in this group

See all 2,061 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.