Abstract
Subsoiling is an effective practice to promote better soil water infiltration and crop growth. The information regarding the variation and persistence of subsoiling effects with different soil disturbance on soil properties and crop growth was absent in previous research. In this study, the effects of wing mounting height (h) (75–155 mm) during subsoiling on soil disturbance at various layers, soil properties and crop performance were investigated using in situ field experiments from 2019 to 2021 in winter wheat–summer maize rotations. The experimental field soil was covered with crop stubble and crop straw was removed before subsoiling or sowing the next crop. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess different subsoiling treatment effects on tested variables, including soil moisture content, bulk density, plant diameter, plant height, dry root weight, root number, yield, and yield components of crops. Means between subsoiling treatments were compared using Duncan’s multiple range tests. Based on ANOVA outputs, the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content in the first growing season of winter wheat (WW1), soil bulk density, number of roots and panicle number and grain yield of WW1, and thousand kernel weight (TKW) of both WW1 and summer maize (SM). Decreasing h overall gave better soil properties and crop performance. Decreased subsoiling effects were found on aspects of insignificant difference in subsequent grain yield of SM and winter wheat in the second growing season (WW2). These findings had implications for designing higher-performance winged subsoilers, as well as selection of subsoiling frequency.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Wing mounting height significantly affected soil moisture content in the first winter wheat season.
- Taxon
- winter wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- wing mounting height (h) (75–155 mm)e1
- Outcome
- soil moisture contente0
- Value
- p < 0.05e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content in the first growing season of winter wheat (WW1)”
e1“wing mounting height (h) (75–155 mm)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wing mounting height significantly affected soil bulk density.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- wing mounting height (h) (75–155 mm)e1
- Outcome
- soil bulk densitye0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content in the first growing season of winter wheat (WW1), soil bulk density”
e1“wing mounting height (h) (75–155 mm)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wing mounting height significantly affected first-season winter wheat root number.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- he1
- Outcome
- number of rootse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“number of roots and panicle number and grain yield of WW1”
e1“the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content in the first growing season of winter wheat (WW1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wing mounting height significantly affected first-season winter wheat panicle number.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- he1
- Outcome
- panicle numbere0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“panicle number and grain yield of WW1”
e1“the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content in the first growing season of winter wheat (WW1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wing mounting height significantly affected first-season winter wheat grain yield.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- he1
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain yield of WW1”
e1“the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content in the first growing season of winter wheat (WW1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wing mounting height significantly affected first-season winter wheat thousand kernel weight.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- he1
- Outcome
- thousand kernel weighte0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“thousand kernel weight (TKW) of both WW1 and summer maize (SM)”
e1“the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content in the first growing season of winter wheat (WW1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wing mounting height significantly affected summer maize thousand kernel weight.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“thousand kernel weight (TKW) of both WW1 and summer maize (SM)”
e1“the h significantly (p < 0.05) affected soil moisture content”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower wing mounting height generally improved soil properties.
- Taxon
- winter wheat–summer maizeTriticum aestivum
Zea mayse1 - Treatment
- Decreasing he0
- Outcome
- soil propertiese0
- Direction
- bettere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Decreasing h overall gave better soil properties and crop performance.”
e1“winter wheat–summer maize rotations”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower wing mounting height generally improved crop performance.
- Taxon
- winter wheat–summer maizeTriticum aestivumZea mayse1
- Treatment
- Decreasing he0
- Outcome
- crop performancee0
- Direction
- bettere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Decreasing h overall gave better soil properties and crop performance.”
e1“winter wheat–summer maize rotations”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsequent summer maize grain yield did not differ significantly among subsoiling treatments.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“insignificant difference in subsequent grain yield of SM and winter wheat in the second growing season (WW2)”
e1“summer maize (SM)”
e2“subsoiling treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-season winter wheat grain yield did not differ significantly among subsoiling treatments.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- subsoiling treatmentse1
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- insignificant differencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“insignificant difference in subsequent grain yield of SM and winter wheat in the second growing season (WW2)”
e1“subsoiling treatments”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
286 papers in the same direction as this paper · 812 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
297 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,116 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 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.