Abstract
Abstract There were no significant yield differences among tillage systems of carrots ( Daucus carota L. cv. Danvers 126) planted into a rye mulch, soybean stubble, and conventionally tilled plots. Secondary root growth of carrot was greater in soybean than either rye or conventionally-tilled carrot plots. Irrigation decreased secondary root growth in conventional tilled and rye mulch plots, but not in the soybean stubble.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Carrot yield did not differ significantly among tillage systems
- Taxon
- carrots
Daucus carotae1 - Treatment
- tillage systemse1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- no significante1
- Comparator
- rye mulch, soybean stubble, and conventionally tilled plotse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“There were no significant yield differences among tillage systems of carrots”
e2“planted into a rye mulch, soybean stubble, and conventionally tilled plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Secondary root growth of carrot was greater in soybean stubble than in rye or conventionally tilled plots
- Taxon
- carrotDaucus carotae3
- Treatment
- soybeane3
- Outcome
- Secondary root growthe3
- Direction
- greatere3
- Comparator
- rye or conventionally-tilled carrot plotse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Secondary root growth of carrot was greater in soybean than either rye or conventionally-tilled carrot plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation decreased secondary root growth of carrot in conventional tilled and rye mulch plots
- Taxon
- carrotDaucus carotae3
- Treatment
- Irrigatione4
- Outcome
- secondary root growthe4
- Direction
- decreasede4
- Qualifier
- in conventional tilled and rye mulch plotse4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Secondary root growth of carrot was greater in soybean than either rye or conventionally-tilled carrot plots”
e4“Irrigation decreased secondary root growth in conventional tilled and rye mulch plots, but not in the soybean stubble”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation did not reduce secondary root growth of carrot in soybean stubble
- Taxon
- carrotDaucus carotae3
- Treatment
- Irrigatione4
- Outcome
- secondary root growthe4
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede4
- Qualifier
- not in the soybean stubblee4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Secondary root growth of carrot was greater in soybean than either rye or conventionally-tilled carrot plots”
e4“Irrigation decreased secondary root growth in conventional tilled and rye mulch plots, but not in the soybean stubble”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · growth · Daucus carota (carrot)Results differ
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →tillage · yield · Daucus carota (carrot)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.