Abstract
The study aimed to investigate the impact of conventional and no-till cultivation on crop productivity, particularly the efficiency of water and nutrient use, and to assess the impact on plant resistance to extreme weather conditions. The study presented the results of the impact of no-till technology on corn and soybean yields in the Southern Steppe of Ukraine, including a comparison of efficiency with the traditional method of tillage. The study included an analysis of agronomic indicators such as yield, plant height, plant density, survival rate and other physiological characteristics of crops. Two soybean varieties (Bettina and Fortress) and two corn hybrids (DCS 4795 and DCS 3730) were used to assess the impact of no-till technology and compare the results for the three years of the study, 2022-2024. The study determined that the use of no-till technology contributed to an increase in both corn and soybean yields. For corn, the yield increase in no-till plots was 13.9-15.1%, and for soybeans – 15.2-17.5% compared to conventional cultivation. These results indicate that the use of minimal tillage helped to retain moisture, improved structure and reduced the risk of erosion, which contributed to better plant growth and increased the ability to withstand stressful weather conditions such as drought. The analysis of the results demonstrated that the height of corn and soybean plants in the no-till plots was higher than in the control plots with conventional technology. However, this demonstrates the long-term benefits of no-till in maintaining soil sustainability and increasing productivity. The study established that no-till technology is an effective method for increasing yields and preserving soil fertility, which is important for the sustainable development of agricultural production in the southern regions of Ukraine
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
No-till increased corn yield by 13.9-15.1% relative to conventional cultivation.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- no-tille0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 13.9-15.1%e0
- Comparator
- conventional cultivatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For corn, the yield increase in no-till plots was 13.9-15.1%, and for soybeans – 15.2-17.5% compared to conventional cultivation.”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till increased soybean yield by 15.2-17.5% relative to conventional cultivation.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxe0 - Treatment
- no-tille0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 15.2-17.5%e0
- Comparator
- conventional cultivatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For corn, the yield increase in no-till plots was 13.9-15.1%, and for soybeans – 15.2-17.5% compared to conventional cultivation.”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till improved soil structure.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“improved structure”
e1“The study determined that the use of no-till technology”
t0“grain and leguminous crops”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till reduced erosion risk.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“reduced the risk of erosion”
e1“The study determined that the use of no-till technology”
t0“grain and leguminous crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Corn plants were taller under no-till than conventional technology.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- no-tille0
- Outcome
- heighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- control plots with conventional technologye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the height of corn and soybean plants in the no-till plots was higher than in the control plots with conventional technology”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean plants were taller under no-till than conventional technology.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- no-tille0
- Outcome
- heighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- control plots with conventional technologye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the height of corn and soybean plants in the no-till plots was higher than in the control plots with conventional technology”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till increased ability to withstand drought.
- Taxon
- cropst0
- Treatment
- no-till technologye1
- Outcome
- ability to withstand stressful weather conditions such as droughte0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“increased the ability to withstand stressful weather conditions such as drought”
e1“The study determined that the use of no-till technology”
t0“grain and leguminous crops”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till was judged effective for increasing yield and preserving soil fertility.
Verbatim
e0“no-till technology is an effective method for increasing yields and preserving soil fertility”
t0“grain and leguminous crops”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
51 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
80 papers more in this group
See all 84 papers →tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 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 · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 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.