Paper · 2024 · Acta Technologica Agriculturae

Chisel Tillage Under Spring Barley in the Forest-Steppe

Yurii Syromyatnikov; Sergey Voinash; Irina Troyanovskaya; et al.

5
claims
9
verbatim quotes
11
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Abstract The degradation of chernozems and increased soil erosion led to the search for more advanced methods of tillage, taking into account climatic conditions, the quantity and quality of crop residues, and the volume of fertilizer application. The aim of the study was to establish the effect of various methods of basic tillage in the presence of preceding plant‘s crop residues on the growth and development of spring barley plants. The experiment was carried out in the forest-steppe of Ukraine. During the experiment, the influence of various methods of basic tillage on the agrophysical properties of the soil, its water regime, and weed infestation of spring barley crops was studied. For comparison, the following types of basic tillage were used: dump to a depth of 20–22 cm, chisel tillage to a depth of 14–16 cm, and disc tillage to a depth of 10–12 cm. Dump and chisel processing were characterized by higher grain yield. Chisel tillage provided better moisture accumulation compared to reverse ploughing. In spring, at the time of sowing grain crops in the layer of 0–15 cm, the reserves of productive moisture during chiselling were 145 mm, and during mouldboard processing 122.6 mm. Thus, chisel tillage for spring barley creates the best conditions for moisture supply and guarantees a high level of grain yield and significant profitability of production.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dump tillage gave higher barley grain yield.

Taxon
Spring BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
Dumpe0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Dump and chisel processing were characterized by higher grain yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 868–936 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chisel tillage gave higher barley grain yield.

Taxon
Spring BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
chisel processinge0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Dump and chisel processing were characterized by higher grain yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 868–936 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chisel tillage accumulated more moisture than reverse ploughing.

Taxon
Spring BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
Chisel tillagee0
Outcome
moisture accumulatione0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
reverse ploughinge0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Chisel tillage provided better moisture accumulation compared to reverse ploughing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 937–1020 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At sowing, productive moisture under chiselling was 145 mm versus 122.6 mm under mouldboard processing.

Taxon
Spring BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
chisellinge0
Outcome
reserves of productive moisturee0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
145 mme0
Qualifier
122.6 mme0
Comparator
mouldboard processinge0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the reserves of productive moisture during chiselling were 145 mm, and during mouldboard processing 122.6 mm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1091–1199 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 21–34 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that chisel tillage creates the best moisture supply and high grain yield for spring barley.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaree0
Outcome
best conditions for moisture supply and guarantees a high level of grain yield and significant profitability of productione0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“chisel tillage for spring barley creates the best conditions for moisture supply and guarantees a high level of grain yield and significant profitability of production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1374 · show in text ↑

dUMP · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

tillage · soil: physics · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

26 papers: 19 positive, 7 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 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.