Abstract
Abstract Soybean is the world’s most widely grown leguminous crop and is an important source of oil and protein for food and feed in addition to other industrial uses. However, herbicide-resistant and troublesome weed control challenges limit yield potential and threaten conservation tillage (CT) systems. Cover crops have been widely adopted as an integrated pest management component in CT systems to suppress weeds and maintain soybean yield potential. A 3-yr field experiment was conducted to estimate the influence of a cereal rye cover crop following CT on the critical period for weed control (CPWC) in soybean. The experiment was implemented in a split-plot design in which main plots as CT following cover crop (CT + CC), CT following winter fallow (CT + WF), and conventional tillage (CVT), and subplots were multiple durations of weed-free and weed interference. Results showed that the estimated CPWC of CT + CC and CT + WF treatments was 0 wk and >7 wk, respectively, in 2018. In 2019, the estimated CPWC was 0 wk, 5.0 wk, and 1.3 wk under CT + CC, CT + WF, and CVT treatments, respectively. In 2020, the estimated CPWC was 3.5 wk, >6.2 wk, and 0 wk under CT + CC, CT + WF, and CVT treatments, respectively. The presence of a cover crop delayed the CTWR and caused an early beginning of the CWFP compared with CT + WF treatment, and hence shortened the CPWC in 2018 and 2019. In conclusion, the CT + WF system did not reduce the weed competition and subsequent yield loss in soybean compared to the CT + CC system.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
The estimated critical weed-control period under CT + CC was 0 weeks in 2018.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“estimated CPWC of CT + CC and CT + WF treatments was 0 wk and >7 wk, respectively, in 2018.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
The estimated critical weed-control period under CT + WF exceeded 7 weeks in 2018.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“estimated CPWC of CT + CC and CT + WF treatments was 0 wk and >7 wk, respectively, in 2018.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2019, the estimated period was 0, 5.0 and 1.3 weeks under CT + CC, CT + WF and CVT, respectively.
- Taxon
- Soybean
Glycine maxt0 - Outcome
- estimated CPWCe0
- Value
- 0 wk, 5.0 wk, and 1.3 wke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2019, the estimated CPWC was 0 wk, 5.0 wk, and 1.3 wk under CT + CC, CT + WF, and CVT treatments, respectively.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2020, the estimated period was 3.5, over 6.2 and 0 weeks under CT + CC, CT + WF and CVT, respectively.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- estimated CPWCe0
- Value
- 3.5 wk, >6.2 wk, and 0 wke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2020, the estimated CPWC was 3.5 wk, >6.2 wk, and 0 wk under CT + CC, CT + WF, and CVT treatments, respectively.”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
The cover crop delayed CTWR relative to CT + WF.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- presence of a cover crope0
- Outcome
- CTWRe0
- Direction
- delayede0
- Comparator
- CT + WF treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The presence of a cover crop delayed the CTWR and caused an early beginning of the CWFP compared with CT + WF treatment”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
The cover crop advanced the beginning of CWFP relative to CT + WF.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- presence of a cover crope0
- Outcome
- CWFPe0
- Direction
- earlye0
- Comparator
- CT + WF treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The presence of a cover crop delayed the CTWR and caused an early beginning of the CWFP compared with CT + WF treatment”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
The cover crop shortened CPWC in 2018 and 2019.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- cover crope1
- Outcome
- CPWCe0
- Direction
- shortenede0
- Qualifier
- 2018 and 2019e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“shortened the CPWC in 2018 and 2019.”
t0“soybean”
e1“The presence of a cover crop delayed the CTWR and caused an early beginning of the CWFP compared with CT + WF treatment, and hence shortened the CPWC in 2018 and 2019.”
Claim · model-written summary
CT + WF did not reduce weed competition or subsequent soybean yield loss relative to CT + CC.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- CT + WF systeme0
- Outcome
- weed competition and subsequent yield losse0
- Direction
- did not reducee0
- Comparator
- CT + CC systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the CT + WF system did not reduce the weed competition and subsequent yield loss in soybean compared to the CT + CC system.”
The same questions in other papers
cover crop · weed · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →tillage · weed · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 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.