Paper · 2022 · Agronomy

Effects of Second-Season Crops on Soybean Cultivation in Compacted Soil in Brazilian Cerrado

Camila Jorge Bernabé Ferreira; Alessandro Guerra da Silva; Vívian Ribeiro de Oliveira Preto; et al.

5
claims
7
verbatim quotes
6
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

In no-tillage systems, soil compaction has caused negative impacts on crop productivity and soil quality. The objective of this study was to evaluate the soil physical quality after different crops of the second season: maize, sorghum, and millet in compacted and uncompacted soils, in addition to evaluating the performance of soybean in succession in Rhodic Ferralsol under no-tillage (NT) in the Brazilian Cerrado biome. A field experiment was conducted during the second season of 2019 and the first season of 2019/20 in Rio Verde, Brazil. The experimental design used randomized blocks in a 3 × 2 factorial scheme, with six replications. The first factor corresponded to the cultivation of maize, sorghum, and millet; the second factor was the cultivation of these crops in compacted and uncompacted soils. The physical properties of the soils in the 0–0.1 and 0.1–0.2 m depth layers were evaluated after the second season of cultivation, in addition to the agronomic characteristics of the soybean cultivated in succession. The results indicate that the compaction influenced the soil physical quality, mainly in the 0.1–0.2 m layer, reflecting a decrease in the performance of the soybean crop (i.e., the plant height, number of pods per plant, and grain yield). The use of the second-season crop of millet improved the soil physical properties of penetration resistance and macroporosity and improved the water/air relation. The use of millet provided a reduction of up to 20% in the soil penetration resistance. About 10% more soybean was produced after cultivation in succession to millet compared to maize and sorghum.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil compaction decreased the performance of the succeeding soybean crop, namely plant height, number of pods per plant and grain yield, relative to uncompacted soil.

Taxon
soybeanGlycine maxe0
Treatment
compactione2
Outcome
the plant height, number of pods per plant, and grain yielde0
Direction
decreasee0
Comparator
uncompacted soilse1

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

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“reflecting a decrease in the performance of the soybean crop (i.e., the plant height, number of pods per plant, and grain yield)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1140–1268 · show in text ↑
e1

“maize, sorghum, and millet in compacted and uncompacted soils, in addition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 220–294 · show in text ↑
e2

“the compaction influenced the soil physical quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1056–1107 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Compaction influenced soil physical quality, mainly in the 0.1-0.2 m layer.

Organ / stage
0.1–0.2 m layere0
Treatment
compactione0
Outcome
soil physical qualitye0

Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0

“the compaction influenced the soil physical quality, mainly in the 0.1–0.2 m layer”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1056–1138 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Using millet as the second-season crop improved the soil physical properties penetration resistance and macroporosity and improved the water/air relation.

Taxon
millete0
Treatment
second-season crop of millete0
Outcome
penetration resistance and macroporositye0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The use of the second-season crop of millet improved the soil physical properties of penetration resistance and macroporosity and improved the water/air relation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1270–1431 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Using millet reduced soil penetration resistance by up to 20%.

Taxon
millete0
Treatment
use of millete0
Outcome
soil penetration resistancee0
Direction
reductione0
Value
up to 20%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The use of millet provided a reduction of up to 20% in the soil penetration resistance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1433–1519 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

About 10% more soybean was produced when grown in succession to millet than in succession to maize and sorghum.

Taxon
soybeanGlycine maxe0
Treatment
cultivation in succession to millete0
Outcome
soybean was producede0
Direction
moree0
Value
About 10%e0
Comparator
maize and sorghume0

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

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“About 10% more soybean was produced after cultivation in succession to millet compared to maize and sorghum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1521–1628 · show in text ↑

tillage · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results

390 papers: 264 positive, 126 negative or no effect

125 papers in the same direction as this paper · 264 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

386 papers more in this group

See all 390 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.