Abstract
Context: To revive the practice of planting legume green manure (GM) in the fallow period in rainfed agricultural areas, it is essential to demonstrate the benefits of this practice on the yields and water use efficiency (WUE) of subsequent crops, especially when integrating with optimized water and fertilizer management. Objectives: We conducted a field experiment to determine the positive effects of planting legume GM in the summer fallow on the yield, WUE, and nitrogen uptake efficiency (NupE) of subsequent winter wheat, which was grown with plastic film mulching and integrated fertilization in the Loess Plateau of China. Methods: A split-plot-designed experiment was arranged with two main treatments, namely (1) wheat planting followed by GM planting in the summer fallow (GM) and (2) conventional wheat monoculture followed by bare land summer fallow (BL), and three sub-treatments: (1) control treatment without any chemical fertilizer (Ct), (2) application of chemical N, P, and K as basal fertilizer (B), and (3) application of basal fertilizer plus wheat straw return (BS). Results: In the initial two years, even in a dry year, GM did not decrease the soil water content and storage (0–200 cm layer) during the subsequent winter wheat season, relative to BL. But in the third and fourth years, GM increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 3.2% and 3.8%, respectively. B and BS increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 14.4% and 22.2%, respectively, during the third experimental year, and by 12.7% and 19.4% during the fourth experimental year, primarily through increasing the population density of winter wheat. The increase in the grain yield contributed to a higher WUE of winter wheat. In the third year, GM increased the water consumption (WC) and WUE of wheat by 2.4% and 1.7%, respectively, though they were far lower than B (8.3% and 5.6%) and BS (10.4% and 10.7%). B and BS resulted in a higher yield and N nutrition than GM alone, but GM combined with B and BS resulted in the highest yield and N nutrition, thus greatly decreasing the NupE and increasing N productivity. Conclusions: Planting legume GM in the fallow can further increase the long-term yield, WUE, and N utilization of winter wheat when integrated with chemical fertilization and wheat straw return in rainfed agriculture. Implications: Our study yields new insights into the agronomic benefits of legume GM application in semi-arid or analogous rainfed agroecosystems and underscores the critical role of water conservation in ensuring dryland agricultural production, particularly in regions undergoing optimization of fertilization.
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 19
Claim · model-written summary
Green manure did not decrease subsequent wheat season soil water content and storage in the first two years.
- Taxon
- winter wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- GMe0
- Outcome
- soil water content and storagee0
- Direction
- did not decreasee0
- Qualifier
- 0–200 cm layere0
- Comparator
- BLe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM did not decrease the soil water content and storage (0–200 cm layer) during the subsequent winter wheat season, relative to BL”
Claim · model-written summary
Green manure raised winter wheat grain yield by 3.2% in year three.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- GMe0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3.2%e0
- Comparator
- BLe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the third and fourth years, GM increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 3.2% and 3.8%, respectively”
t0“Winter Wheat”
e1“GM did not decrease the soil water content and storage (0–200 cm layer) during the subsequent winter wheat season, relative to BL”
Claim · model-written summary
Green manure raised winter wheat grain yield by 3.8% in year four.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- GMe0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3.8%e0
- Comparator
- BLe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the third and fourth years, GM increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 3.2% and 3.8%, respectively”
t0“Winter Wheat”
e1“GM did not decrease the soil water content and storage (0–200 cm layer) during the subsequent winter wheat season, relative to BL”
Claim · model-written summary
B increased winter wheat grain yield by 14.4% in year three.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Be0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 14.4%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“B and BS increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 14.4% and 22.2%, respectively, during the third experimental year, and by 12.7% and 19.4% during the fourth experimental year”
t0“Winter Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
BS increased winter wheat grain yield by 22.2% in year three.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- BSe0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 22.2%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“B and BS increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 14.4% and 22.2%, respectively, during the third experimental year, and by 12.7% and 19.4% during the fourth experimental year”
t0“Winter Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
B increased winter wheat grain yield by 12.7% in year four.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Be0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 12.7%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“B and BS increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 14.4% and 22.2%, respectively, during the third experimental year, and by 12.7% and 19.4% during the fourth experimental year”
t0“Winter Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
BS increased winter wheat grain yield by 19.4% in year four.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- BSe0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 19.4%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“B and BS increased the grain yield of winter wheat by 14.4% and 22.2%, respectively, during the third experimental year, and by 12.7% and 19.4% during the fourth experimental year”
t0“Winter Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield increases arose primarily through increased wheat population density.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- population densitye0
- Qualifier
- increasing the population densitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“primarily through increasing the population density of winter wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher grain yield contributed to higher wheat water use efficiency.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Qualifier
- increase in the grain yielde0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The increase in the grain yield contributed to a higher WUE of winter wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
In year three, GM increased wheat water consumption (WC) by 2.4%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- GMe0
- Outcome
- water consumption (WC)e0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2.4%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the third year, GM increased the water consumption (WC) and WUE of wheat by 2.4% and 1.7%, respectively, though they were far lower than B (8.3% and 5.6%) and BS (10.4% and 10.7%)”
Claim · model-written summary
In year three, GM increased wheat WUE by 1.7%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the third year, GM increased the water consumption (WC) and WUE of wheat by 2.4% and 1.7%, respectively, though they were far lower than B (8.3% and 5.6%) and BS (10.4% and 10.7%)”
Claim · model-written summary
In year three, B increased wheat water consumption (WC) by 8.3%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Be0
- Outcome
- water consumption (WC)e0
- Value
- 8.3%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the third year, GM increased the water consumption (WC) and WUE of wheat by 2.4% and 1.7%, respectively, though they were far lower than B (8.3% and 5.6%) and BS (10.4% and 10.7%)”
Claim · model-written summary
In year three, B increased wheat WUE by 5.6%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Be0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Value
- 5.6%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the third year, GM increased the water consumption (WC) and WUE of wheat by 2.4% and 1.7%, respectively, though they were far lower than B (8.3% and 5.6%) and BS (10.4% and 10.7%)”
Claim · model-written summary
In year three, BS increased wheat water consumption (WC) by 10.4%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- BSe0
- Outcome
- water consumption (WC)e0
- Value
- 10.4%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the third year, GM increased the water consumption (WC) and WUE of wheat by 2.4% and 1.7%, respectively, though they were far lower than B (8.3% and 5.6%) and BS (10.4% and 10.7%)”
Claim · model-written summary
In year three, BS increased wheat WUE by 10.7%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- BSe0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Value
- 10.7%e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the third year, GM increased the water consumption (WC) and WUE of wheat by 2.4% and 1.7%, respectively, though they were far lower than B (8.3% and 5.6%) and BS (10.4% and 10.7%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Basal fertilizer and basal fertilizer with straw produced higher yield and nitrogen nutrition than green manure alone.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- B and BSe0
- Outcome
- yield and N nutritione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- GM alonee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“B and BS resulted in a higher yield and N nutrition than GM alone”
t0“Winter Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Green manure with basal fertilizer and straw achieved the highest yield and nitrogen nutrition.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- GM combined with B and BSe0
- Outcome
- yield and N nutritione0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM combined with B and BS resulted in the highest yield and N nutrition”
t0“Winter Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Green manure combined with fertilization decreased nitrogen uptake efficiency.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- GM combined with B and BSe0
- Outcome
- NupEe0
- Direction
- decreasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM combined with B and BS resulted in the highest yield and N nutrition, thus greatly decreasing the NupE and increasing N productivity”
t0“Winter Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Green manure combined with fertilization increased nitrogen productivity.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- GM combined with B and BSe0
- Outcome
- N productivitye0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM combined with B and BS resulted in the highest yield and N nutrition, thus greatly decreasing the NupE and increasing N productivity”
t0“Winter Wheat”
The same questions in other papers
boron atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
61 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
72 papers more in this group
See all 76 papers →boron atom · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
fertilization · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 85 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
94 papers more in this group
See all 98 papers →fertilization · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
98 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →fertilization · nutrient: efficiency · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 142 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
172 papers more in this group
See all 176 papers →fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- positive
3,434 papers more in this group
See all 3,438 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.