Abstract
Introduction: Drip irrigation is an efficient water-saving system used to improve crop production worldwide. However, we still lack a comprehensive understanding of maize plant senescence and its association with yield, soil water, and nitrogen (N) utilization under this system. Methods: A 3-year field experiment in the northeast plains of China was used to assess four drip irrigation systems: (1) drip irrigation under plastic film mulch (PI); (2) drip irrigation under biodegradable film mulch (BI); (3) drip irrigation incorporating straw returning (SI); and (4) drip irrigation with the tape buried at a shallow soil depth (OI), and furrow irrigation (FI) was used as the control. The plant senescence characteristic based on the dynamic process of green leaf area (GLA) and live root length density (LRLD) during the reproductive stage, and its correlation with leaf N components, water use efficiency (WUE), and N use efficiency (NUE) was investigated. Results: PI followed by BI achieved the highest integral GLA and LRLD, grain filling rate, and leaf and root senescence rate after silking. Greater yield, WUE, and NUE were positively associated with higher N translocation efficiency of leaf protein responding for photosynthesis, respiration, and structure under PI and BI; whereas, no significant differences were found in yield, WUE, and NUE between PI and BI. SI effectively promoted LRLD in the deeper 20- to 100-cm soil layers, prolonged the GLA and LRLD persistent durations, and reduced the leaf and root senescence rates. The remobilization of non-protein storage N was stimulated by SI, FI, and OI, which made up for the relative inadequacy of leaf N. Discussion: Instead of persistent GLA and LRLD durations and high translocation efficiency of non-protein storage N, fast and large protein N translocation from leaves to grains under PI and BI was found to facilitate maize yield, WUE, and NUE in the sole cropping semi-arid region, and BI was recommend considering that it can reduce plastic pollution.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
PI followed by BI had the highest integrated green leaf area and live root length density.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PI followed by BI achieved the highest integral GLA and LRLD, grain filling rate, and leaf and root senescence rate after silking”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PI followed by BI had the highest grain filling rate.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PI followed by BI achieved the highest integral GLA and LRLD, grain filling rate, and leaf and root senescence rate after silking”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PI followed by BI had the highest leaf and root senescence rate after silking.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PI followed by BI achieved the highest integral GLA and LRLD, grain filling rate, and leaf and root senescence rate after silking”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield, WUE and NUE were positively associated with leaf protein nitrogen translocation efficiency under PI and BI.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Greater yield, WUE, and NUE were positively associated with higher N translocation efficiency of leaf protein responding for photosynthesis, respiration, and structure under PI and BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
PI and BI did not significantly differ in yield, WUE or NUE.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant differences were found in yield, WUE, and NUE between PI and BI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI promoted deeper live root length density.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SI effectively promoted LRLD in the deeper 20- to 100-cm soil layers”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI prolonged persistence of green leaf area and live root length density.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SI effectively promoted LRLD in the deeper 20- to 100-cm soil layers, prolonged the GLA and LRLD persistent durations”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI reduced leaf and root senescence rates.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SI effectively promoted LRLD in the deeper 20- to 100-cm soil layers, prolonged the GLA and LRLD persistent durations, and reduced the leaf and root senescence rates”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
SI stimulated remobilization of non-protein storage nitrogen.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The remobilization of non-protein storage N was stimulated by SI, FI, and OI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
FI stimulated remobilization of non-protein storage nitrogen.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The remobilization of non-protein storage N was stimulated by SI, FI, and OI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
OI stimulated remobilization of non-protein storage nitrogen.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The remobilization of non-protein storage N was stimulated by SI, FI, and OI”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Fast, large leaf protein nitrogen translocation under PI and BI was interpreted to facilitate yield, WUE and NUE.
- Treatment
- PI and BIe0
- Outcome
- maize yield, WUE, and NUEe0
- Qualifier
- fast and large protein N translocation from leaves to grainse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“fast and large protein N translocation from leaves to grains under PI and BI was found to facilitate maize yield, WUE, and NUE in the sole cropping semi-arid region”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend BI because it can reduce plastic pollution.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BI was recommend considering that it can reduce plastic pollution”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 108 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →organic · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
125 papers more in this group
See all 129 papers →mulching · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
121 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
136 papers more in this group
See all 140 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 papers →organic · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.