Abstract
Purpose: to conduct research dedicated to assessing the impact of primary soil cultivation techniques and the microelements application on the yield of cereal and leguminous grain crops. Materials and methods. The effect of moldboard plowing (25–27 cm), flat-cutting (20–22 cm), minimum surface tillage (8–10 cm) and no-tillage on the yield of leguminous crops (soybeans, peas, chickpeas) and cereal grains (spring wheat, Sudan grass) is studied. The studies were conducted at the experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamation in 2022–2024 using generally accepted methods. Results. The impact of basic tillage techniques and the impact of micro-fertilizers on vegetation in cereal and leguminous crops agrocenoses on productivity and its structure have been studied. The use of flat-cutting and the micronutrients application for cereals and legumes increased the yield indicators on average for soybeans – by 65.9 %, peas – 48.5 %, chickpeas – 41.8 %, spring wheat – 61.3 %, Sudan grass – 26.3 % compared with the no-tillage option. The maximum yield was obtained on soybeans with the use of flat-cutting tillage – 3.45 t/ha, and the minimum at no-tillage – 1.94 t/ha. The impact of flat-cutting tillage on the spring wheat productivity is expressed by an increase in yield by 0.34 t/ha, compared with no-tillage. Chickpea yield is higher when using flat-cutting tillage with leaf dressing – 2.75 t/ha, and without tillage and dressing – 1.87 t/ha. The yield of Sudan grass of two staves when using flat cutting tillage with the micronutrients application on vegetation is 40.37 t/ha and 31.50 t/ha with no-tillage. Conclusions. For the soil and climatic conditions of the dry steppe Volga region, it has been proven that when cultivating chickpeas, soybeans, peas, Sudan grass and spring wheat as examples, the best indicators of the crop structure were achieved in variants using flat-cutting tillage against the background of the micronutrients application to vegetative plants.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-sa. 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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Flat-cutting tillage with micronutrient application increased soybean yield indicators by 65.9% compared with no-tillage.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxe1 - Treatment
- flat-cutting and the micronutrients applicatione2
- Outcome
- yield indicatorse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 65.9 %e1
- Comparator
- no-tillage optione1
- Setting
- experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“increased the yield indicators on average for soybeans – by 65.9 %, peas – 48.5 %, chickpeas – 41.8 %, spring wheat – 61.3 %, Sudan grass – 26.3 % compared with the no-tillage option”
e2“The use of flat-cutting and the micronutrients application for cereals and legumes”
e3“The studies were conducted at the experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamation in 2022–2024”
Claim · model-written summary
Flat-cutting tillage with micronutrient application increased pea yield indicators by 48.5% compared with no-tillage.
- Taxon
- peas
Lathyrus oleraceuse1 - Treatment
- flat-cutting and the micronutrients applicatione2
- Outcome
- yield indicatorse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 48.5 %e1
- Comparator
- no-tillage optione1
- Setting
- experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“increased the yield indicators on average for soybeans – by 65.9 %, peas – 48.5 %, chickpeas – 41.8 %, spring wheat – 61.3 %, Sudan grass – 26.3 % compared with the no-tillage option”
e2“The use of flat-cutting and the micronutrients application for cereals and legumes”
e3“The studies were conducted at the experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamation in 2022–2024”
Claim · model-written summary
Flat-cutting tillage with micronutrient application increased chickpea yield indicators by 41.8% compared with no-tillage.
- Taxon
- chickpeas
Cicer arietinume1 - Treatment
- flat-cutting and the micronutrients applicatione2
- Outcome
- yield indicatorse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 41.8 %e1
- Comparator
- no-tillage optione1
- Setting
- experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“increased the yield indicators on average for soybeans – by 65.9 %, peas – 48.5 %, chickpeas – 41.8 %, spring wheat – 61.3 %, Sudan grass – 26.3 % compared with the no-tillage option”
e2“The use of flat-cutting and the micronutrients application for cereals and legumes”
e3“The studies were conducted at the experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamation in 2022–2024”
Claim · model-written summary
Flat-cutting tillage with micronutrient application increased spring wheat yield indicators by 61.3% compared with no-tillage.
- Taxon
- spring wheat
Triticum aestivume1 - Treatment
- flat-cutting and the micronutrients applicatione2
- Outcome
- yield indicatorse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 61.3 %e1
- Comparator
- no-tillage optione1
- Setting
- experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“increased the yield indicators on average for soybeans – by 65.9 %, peas – 48.5 %, chickpeas – 41.8 %, spring wheat – 61.3 %, Sudan grass – 26.3 % compared with the no-tillage option”
e2“The use of flat-cutting and the micronutrients application for cereals and legumes”
e3“The studies were conducted at the experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamation in 2022–2024”
Claim · model-written summary
Flat-cutting tillage with micronutrient application increased Sudan grass yield indicators by 26.3% compared with no-tillage.
- Taxon
- Sudan grass
Sorghum ×drummondiie1 - Treatment
- flat-cutting and the micronutrients applicatione2
- Outcome
- yield indicatorse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 26.3 %e1
- Comparator
- no-tillage optione1
- Setting
- experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamatione3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“increased the yield indicators on average for soybeans – by 65.9 %, peas – 48.5 %, chickpeas – 41.8 %, spring wheat – 61.3 %, Sudan grass – 26.3 % compared with the no-tillage option”
e2“The use of flat-cutting and the micronutrients application for cereals and legumes”
e3“The studies were conducted at the experimental production farm of the Volga Research Institute of Hydraulic Engineering and Land Reclamation in 2022–2024”
Claim · model-written summary
The maximum soybean yield, 3.45 t/ha, was obtained with flat-cutting tillage.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxe1
- Treatment
- flat-cutting tillagee1
- Outcome
- maximum yielde1
- Direction
- maximume1
- Value
- 3.45 t/hae1
- Comparator
- no-tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The maximum yield was obtained on soybeans with the use of flat-cutting tillage – 3.45 t/ha, and the minimum at no-tillage – 1.94 t/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
The minimum soybean yield, 1.94 t/ha, occurred under no-tillage.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxe1
- Treatment
- no-tillagee1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- minimume1
- Value
- 1.94 t/hae1
- Comparator
- flat-cutting tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The maximum yield was obtained on soybeans with the use of flat-cutting tillage – 3.45 t/ha, and the minimum at no-tillage – 1.94 t/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
Flat-cutting tillage increased spring wheat yield by 0.34 t/ha compared with no-tillage.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- flat-cutting tillagee1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- increasee1
- Value
- 0.34 t/hae1
- Comparator
- no-tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The impact of flat-cutting tillage on the spring wheat productivity is expressed by an increase in yield by 0.34 t/ha, compared with no-tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Chickpea yield was higher with flat-cutting tillage plus leaf dressing (2.75 t/ha) than without tillage and dressing (1.87 t/ha).
- Taxon
- ChickpeaCicer arietinume1
- Treatment
- flat-cutting tillage with leaf dressinge1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 2.75 t/hae1
- Qualifier
- 1.87 t/hae1
- Comparator
- without tillage and dressinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Chickpea yield is higher when using flat-cutting tillage with leaf dressing – 2.75 t/ha, and without tillage and dressing – 1.87 t/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
Sudan grass yield with flat-cutting tillage plus micronutrient application on vegetation (40.37 t/ha) was higher than with no-tillage (31.50 t/ha).
- Taxon
- Sudan grassSorghum ×drummondiie1
- Treatment
- flat cutting tillage with the micronutrients application on vegetatione1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 40.37 t/hae1
- Qualifier
- 31.50 t/hae1
- Comparator
- no-tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The yield of Sudan grass of two staves when using flat cutting tillage with the micronutrients application on vegetation is 40.37 t/ha and 31.50 t/ha with no-tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
The best crop-structure indicators were achieved with flat-cutting tillage plus micronutrient application on chickpeas, soybeans, peas, Sudan grass and spring wheat.
- Taxon
- chickpeas, soybeans, peas, Sudan grass and spring wheatCicer arietinumGlycine maxLathyrus oleraceusTriticum aestivumSorghum ×drummondiie2
- Treatment
- flat-cutting tillage against the background of the micronutrients applicatione1
- Outcome
- the best indicators of the crop structuree1
- Direction
- beste1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the best indicators of the crop structure were achieved in variants using flat-cutting tillage against the background of the micronutrients application to vegetative plants”
e2“when cultivating chickpeas, soybeans, peas, Sudan grass and spring wheat”
The same questions in other papers
micronutrient · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
43 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
47 papers more in this group
See all 51 papers →micronutrient · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →micronutrient · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
70 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →tillage · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
78 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
93 papers more in this group
See all 97 papers →tillage · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
263 papers in the same direction as this paper · 100 in the opposite direction · 26 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
386 papers more in this group
See all 390 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 papers →tillage · yield · Sorghum x drummondii (Sudan grass)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
pruning · yield · Sorghum x drummondii (Sudan grass)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.