Abstract
Abstract Climate smart agriculture has been emphasized for mitigating anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, yet the mitigation potential of individual management practices remain largely unexplored in semi-arid cropping systems. This study evaluated the effects of different winter cover crop mixtures on CO 2 and N 2 O emissions, net GHG balance (GHG net ), greenhouse gas intensity (GHGI), yield-scaled GHG emissions, and soil properties in irrigated forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) rotations. Four cover crop treatments: (1) grasses, brassicas, and legumes mixture (GBL), (2) grasses and brassicas mixture (GB), (3) grasses and legumes mixture (GL), and (4) a no-cover crop (NCC) control, each replicated four times under corn and sorghum phase of the rotations, were tested in the semi-arid Southern Great Plains of USA. Results showed 5–10 times higher soil respiration with cover crop mixtures than NCC during the cover crop phase and no difference during the cash crop phase. The average N 2 O-N emission in NCC was 44% lower than GL and 77% lower than GBL in corn and sorghum rotations. Cash crop yield was 13–30% greater in cover crop treatments than NCC, but treatment effects were not observed for GHG net , yield-scaled emissions, and GHGI. Integrating cover crops could be a climate smart strategy for forage production in irrigated semi-arid agroecosystems.
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
Cover crop mixtures increased soil respiration five to tenfold during the cover crop phase relative to no cover crop.
- Taxon
- forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)
Sorghum bicolor
Zea mayse1 - Treatment
- cover crop mixturese0
- Outcome
- soil respiratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5–10 timese0
- Qualifier
- during the cover crop phasee0
- Comparator
- NCCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“5–10 times higher soil respiration with cover crop mixtures than NCC during the cover crop phase”
e1“forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crop mixtures and no cover crop did not differ in soil respiration during the cash crop phase.
- Taxon
- forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)Sorghum bicolorZea mayse1
- Treatment
- cover crop mixturese2
- Outcome
- soil respiratione2
- Direction
- no differencee0
- Comparator
- NCCe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no difference during the cash crop phase”
e2“soil respiration with cover crop mixtures than NCC”
e1“forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
No-cover treatment had 44% lower N2O-N emissions than the grasses and legumes mixture.
- Taxon
- forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)Sorghum bicolorZea mayse1
- Treatment
- NCCe0
- Outcome
- N 2 O-N emissione0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 44%e0
- Comparator
- GLe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average N 2 O-N emission in NCC was 44% lower than GL and 77% lower than GBL in corn and sorghum rotations.”
e1“forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
No-cover treatment had 77% lower N2O-N emissions than the grasses, brassicas and legumes mixture.
- Taxon
- forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)Sorghum bicolorZea mayse1
- Treatment
- NCCe0
- Outcome
- N 2 O-N emissione0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 77%e0
- Comparator
- GBLe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average N 2 O-N emission in NCC was 44% lower than GL and 77% lower than GBL in corn and sorghum rotations.”
e1“forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crop treatments increased cash crop yield by 13–30% relative to no cover crop.
- Taxon
- forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)Sorghum bicolorZea mayse1
- Treatment
- cover crop treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Cash crop yielde0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 13–30%e0
- Comparator
- NCCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cash crop yield was 13–30% greater in cover crop treatments than NCC”
e1“forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crop treatments had no observed effect on net greenhouse gas balance, yield-scaled emissions or greenhouse gas intensity.
- Taxon
- forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)Sorghum bicolorZea mayse1
- Treatment
- cover crop treatmentse2
- Outcome
- GHG net , yield-scaled emissions, and GHGIe0
- Direction
- not observede0
- Comparator
- NCCe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment effects were not observed for GHG net , yield-scaled emissions, and GHGI”
e2“cover crop treatments than NCC”
e1“forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)”
Claim · model-written summary
Integrating cover crops could be a climate-smart strategy for irrigated semi-arid forage production.
- Taxon
- forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)Sorghum bicolorZea mayse1
- Outcome
- Integrating cover cropse0
- Setting
- irrigated semi-arid agroecosystemse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Integrating cover crops could be a climate smart strategy for forage production in irrigated semi-arid agroecosystems.”
e1“forage corn ( Zea mays L.) and sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)”
The same questions in other papers
cover crop · soil: biology · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →cover crop · yield · Sorghum bicolor (sorghum)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →cover crop · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
103 papers in the same direction as this paper · 104 in the opposite direction · 14 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
218 papers more in this group
See all 222 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.