Abstract
Soybeans are a crucial major food source in human and animal nutrition due to their high fat and protein content. This study investigated the effects of different irrigation methods on yield and yield components of second-crop soybeans under deficit irrigation conditions. The study aimed to determine the crop evapotranspiration, water productivity (WP), and irrigation water productivity (IWP) of the second crop soybean. The study followed a split plot random block experimental design with three replications. The main treatments of the study were subsurface drip irrigation (SDI), drip irrigation (DI), and furrow irrigation (FI) with four different water application levels (100%, 75%, 50%, and 25%) serving as subtreatments. Crop evapotranspiration (ETc) ranged between 236–482 mm for DI, 185–410 mm for SDI, and 275–562 mm for FI during 2018 and 2019. The yields for DI, SDI, and FI varied between 3,340–4,030 kg ha−1, 3,250−3,780 kg ha−1, and 2,800–3,680 kg ha−1 during 2018 and 2019, respectively. The effect of water deficit applications on yield was statistically significant at p<0.05 level. It was determined that the yield components of soybeans were negatively affected by deficit irrigation treatments, but the effect of different irrigation methods was not significant. There was no statistical difference between the treatment with 25% deficit irrigation and the full irrigation comparing the yield and yield components of the study. Moreover, WP and IWP values increased as the amount of irrigation water decreased in all irrigation methods. Thus, a 25% deficit is recommended as an alternative to full irrigation in the Mediterranean Basin when water resources are scarce.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Crop evapotranspiration of second-crop soybeans ranged between 236-482 mm under drip irrigation (DI) in 2018 and 2019.
Verbatim
e1“Crop evapotranspiration (ETc) ranged between 236–482 mm for DI, 185–410 mm for SDI, and 275–562 mm for FI during 2018 and 2019”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop evapotranspiration of second-crop soybeans ranged between 185-410 mm under subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) in 2018 and 2019.
Verbatim
e1“Crop evapotranspiration (ETc) ranged between 236–482 mm for DI, 185–410 mm for SDI, and 275–562 mm for FI during 2018 and 2019”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop evapotranspiration of second-crop soybeans ranged between 275-562 mm under furrow irrigation (FI) in 2018 and 2019.
Verbatim
e1“Crop evapotranspiration (ETc) ranged between 236–482 mm for DI, 185–410 mm for SDI, and 275–562 mm for FI during 2018 and 2019”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean yield under DI varied between 3,340-4,030 kg ha-1 during 2018 and 2019.
Verbatim
e1“The yields for DI, SDI, and FI varied between 3,340–4,030 kg ha−1, 3,250−3,780 kg ha−1, and 2,800–3,680 kg ha−1 during 2018 and 2019”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean yield under SDI varied between 3,250-3,780 kg ha-1 during 2018 and 2019.
Verbatim
e1“The yields for DI, SDI, and FI varied between 3,340–4,030 kg ha−1, 3,250−3,780 kg ha−1, and 2,800–3,680 kg ha−1 during 2018 and 2019”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean yield under FI varied between 2,800-3,680 kg ha-1 during 2018 and 2019.
Verbatim
e1“The yields for DI, SDI, and FI varied between 3,340–4,030 kg ha−1, 3,250−3,780 kg ha−1, and 2,800–3,680 kg ha−1 during 2018 and 2019”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
The effect of water deficit applications on soybean yield was statistically significant at p<0.05.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e1“The effect of water deficit applications on yield was statistically significant at p<0.05 level”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean yield components were negatively affected by deficit irrigation treatments.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxe1 - Treatment
- deficit irrigation treatmentse1
- Outcome
- yield componentse1
- Direction
- negatively affectede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the yield components of soybeans were negatively affected by deficit irrigation treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
The effect of different irrigation methods on soybean yield components was not significant.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxe2
- Treatment
- different irrigation methodse1
- Outcome
- yield componentse2
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the effect of different irrigation methods was not significant”
e2“the yield components of soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
There was no statistical difference in soybean yield and yield components between 25% deficit irrigation and full irrigation.
Verbatim
e1“There was no statistical difference between the treatment with 25% deficit irrigation and the full irrigation comparing the yield and yield components of the study”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
Water productivity (WP) and irrigation water productivity (IWP) of soybean increased as the amount of irrigation water decreased in all irrigation methods.
Verbatim
e1“WP and IWP values increased as the amount of irrigation water decreased in all irrigation methods”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
Claim · model-written summary
A 25% deficit irrigation is recommended as an alternative to full irrigation for second-crop soybeans in the Mediterranean Basin when water resources are scarce.
Verbatim
e1“a 25% deficit is recommended as an alternative to full irrigation in the Mediterranean Basin when water resources are scarce”
t0“Second-Crop Soybeans”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
78 papers in the same direction as this paper · 264 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
339 papers more in this group
See all 343 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.