Paper · 2025 · Microorganisms

Integrating Cover Crops and Manure to Boost Goji Berry Yield: Responses of Soil Physicochemical Properties and Microbial Communities

Haonan Chen; Fang Wang; Yamiao Gao; et al.

11
claims
19
verbatim quotes
4
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

A sustainable Goji berry (Lycium barbarum L.) planting system that integrates forage radish cover crops (Raphanus sativus L.) and animal manure has been established in northwestern China. This study investigated the effects of different cropping systems and manure application levels on soil physicochemical properties, microbial community structure, and L. barbarum yield under field conditions. A split-plot design was used, with the main-plot treatments consisting of two cropping systems and the sub-plot treatments involving three manure application levels. The results showed that compared to L. barbarum monocropping, cover cropping with R. sativus led to a decrease in soil bulk density (1.90%) and increase in soil electrical conductivity (11.5%), nutrient contents (total N and available N, P, and K: 30.3–138%), and microbial biomass (C: 79.0%; N: 184%). Cover cropping additionally enhanced the community diversity and richness of soil bacteria. Beta-diversity analysis revealed significant differences in bacterial rather than fungal community composition among various treatments. The bacterial network showed a lower ratio of positive to negative correlations and reduced complexity in response to cover cropping, which contrasted with fungal network patterns. Integration of cover cropping and medium manure application increased fruit yield by 8.71%. Cover crops and manure influenced soil microbial diversity mainly through their positive effects on soil total and available N contents.

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Radish cover cropping reduced soil bulk density by 1.90%.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume0
Treatment
cover cropping with R. sativuse0
Interactor
R. sativusRaphanus sativuse0other
Outcome
soil bulk densitye0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
1.90%e0
Comparator
L. barbarum monocroppinge0

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Raphanus sativus
Raphanus sativus · InteractorSelf, en:User:Jengod · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“compared to L. barbarum monocropping, cover cropping with R. sativus led to a decrease in soil bulk density (1.90%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 587–702 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover cropping increased soil electrical conductivity by 11.5%.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume0
Treatment
cover cropping with R. sativuse0
Interactor
R. sativusRaphanus sativuse0other
Outcome
soil electrical conductivitye0
Direction
increasee0
Value
11.5%e0
Comparator
L. barbarum monocroppinge0

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Raphanus sativus
Raphanus sativus · InteractorSelf, en:User:Jengod · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“compared to L. barbarum monocropping, cover cropping with R. sativus led to a decrease in soil bulk density (1.90%) and increase in soil electrical conductivity (11.5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 587–755 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover cropping increased soil total and available nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium by 30.3–138%.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume0
Treatment
cover cropping with R. sativuse0
Interactor
R. sativusRaphanus sativuse0other
Outcome
nutrient contents (total N and available N, P, and Ke0
Direction
increasee0
Value
30.3–138%e0
Comparator
L. barbarum monocroppinge0

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Raphanus sativus
Raphanus sativus · InteractorSelf, en:User:Jengod · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“compared to L. barbarum monocropping, cover cropping with R. sativus led to a decrease in soil bulk density (1.90%) and increase in soil electrical conductivity (11.5%), nutrient contents (total N and available N, P, and K: 30.3–138%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 587–821 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover cropping increased soil microbial biomass carbon by 79.0%.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Treatment
cover cropping with R. sativuse0
Interactor
R. sativusRaphanus sativuse0other
Outcome
microbial biomasse0
Direction
increasee0
Value
79.0%e0
Comparator
L. barbarum monocroppinge1

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Raphanus sativus
Raphanus sativus · InteractorSelf, en:User:Jengod · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cover cropping with R. sativus led to a decrease in soil bulk density (1.90%) and increase in soil electrical conductivity (11.5%), nutrient contents (total N and available N, P, and K: 30.3–138%), and microbial biomass (C: 79.0%; N: 184%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 625–864 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum monocropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 599–623 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover cropping increased soil microbial biomass nitrogen by 184%.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Treatment
cover cropping with R. sativuse0
Interactor
R. sativusRaphanus sativuse0other
Outcome
microbial biomasse0
Direction
increasee0
Value
184%e0
Comparator
L. barbarum monocroppinge1

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Raphanus sativus
Raphanus sativus · InteractorSelf, en:User:Jengod · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cover cropping with R. sativus led to a decrease in soil bulk density (1.90%) and increase in soil electrical conductivity (11.5%), nutrient contents (total N and available N, P, and K: 30.3–138%), and microbial biomass (C: 79.0%; N: 184%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 625–864 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum monocropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 599–623 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover cropping enhanced soil bacterial diversity and richness.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Treatment
Cover croppinge0
Interactor
soil bacteriae0other
Outcome
community diversity and richness of soil bacteriae0
Direction
enhancede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cover cropping additionally enhanced the community diversity and richness of soil bacteria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 866–956 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–372 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bacterial community composition differed significantly among treatments.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Treatment
various treatmentse0
Interactor
bacteriale0other
Outcome
bacterial rather than fungal community compositione0

Not reportedDirection

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“significant differences in bacterial rather than fungal community composition among various treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 991–1093 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–372 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover cropping lowered the bacterial network positive-to-negative correlation ratio and complexity.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Treatment
cover croppinge0
Interactor
bacteriale0other
Outcome
ratio of positive to negative correlations and reduced complexitye0
Direction
lowere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The bacterial network showed a lower ratio of positive to negative correlations and reduced complexity in response to cover cropping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1095–1227 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–372 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fungal network patterns contrasted with bacterial patterns under cover cropping.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Interactor
fungale0other
Outcome
fungal network patternse0

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“which contrasted with fungal network patterns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1229–1274 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–372 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover cropping plus medium manure increased fruit yield by 8.71%.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Treatment
cover cropping and medium manure applicatione0
Outcome
fruit yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
8.71%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Integration of cover cropping and medium manure application increased fruit yield by 8.71%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1276–1366 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–372 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cover crops and manure affected soil microbial diversity mainly through increased total and available nitrogen.

Taxon
L. barbarumLycium barbarume1
Treatment
Cover crops and manuree0
Outcome
soil microbial diversitye0
Qualifier
positive effects on soil total and available N contentse0

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

Lycium barbarum
Lycium barbarum · TaxonSten Porse · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cover crops and manure influenced soil microbial diversity mainly through their positive effects on soil total and available N contents”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1368–1503 · show in text ↑
e1

“L. barbarum yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–372 · show in text ↑

fertilization · yield · Lycium barbarum (wolfberry)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

cover crop · nutrient: content · Lycium barbarum (wolfberry)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 →

cover crop · soil: physics · Lycium barbarum (wolfberry)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 →

cover crop · yield · Lycium barbarum (wolfberry)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 →

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.