Abstract
To clarify the optimal water regulation strategy for spring wheat in arid areas, this study set up three irrigation methods [film-mulched drip irrigation (FD), non-mulched drip irrigation (ND), non-mulched subsurface drip irrigation (MD)] and five water treatments [CK: 80% field capacity; W1–W4: irrigation amounts were 90%, 80%, 70%, and 60% of CK, respectively] in the Shiyang River Basin during 2023–2024. The effects of these treatments on the phenotype, yield, and water use efficiency (WUE) of spring wheat were investigated. The results showed that under the same water treatment, the leaf area index (LAI), SPAD value, and stem diameter (SD) significantly decreased with the reduction in irrigation amount (p < 0.05), while plant height (HC) was less affected. FD performed optimally under the W1 treatment: its yield reached 11,868.93 kg·ha−1, which was 54.88% and 38.72% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively; and its WUE reached 4.36 kg/m3, which was 123.19% and 100.83% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively. ND performed better under the CK treatment: its yield was 10,044.33 kg·ha−1, which was 27.07% and 12.25% higher than that of FD and MD, respectively. Annual precipitation had a significant impact: when precipitation was 175 mm in 2023, ND showed an obvious advantage; when precipitation decreased to 110 mm in 2024, FD exhibited stronger stress resistance. The study concludes that FD is suitable for moderate to severe water stress, while ND is suitable for sufficient water conditions or mild stress. This can provide a basis for water-saving and the high-yield production of spring wheat in arid areas.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Under the same water treatment, LAI, SPAD value and stem diameter of spring wheat decreased significantly as irrigation amount was reduced.
- Taxon
- Spring Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- reduction in irrigation amounte0
- Outcome
- leaf area index (LAI), SPAD value, and stem diameter (SD)e0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“under the same water treatment, the leaf area index (LAI), SPAD value, and stem diameter (SD) significantly decreased with the reduction in irrigation amount (p < 0.05)”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant height of spring wheat was less affected by the reduction in irrigation.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- plant height (HC)e0
- Direction
- less affectede0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“while plant height (HC) was less affected”
Claim · model-written summary
Under W1, film-mulched drip irrigation (FD) yield reached 11,868.93 kg/ha, 54.88% higher than non-mulched drip irrigation (ND).
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- FDe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 54.88%e0
- Comparator
- NDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“FD performed optimally under the W1 treatment: its yield reached 11,868.93 kg·ha−1, which was 54.88% and 38.72% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Under W1, FD yield was 38.72% higher than non-mulched subsurface drip irrigation (MD).
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- FDe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 38.72%e0
- Comparator
- MDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“FD performed optimally under the W1 treatment: its yield reached 11,868.93 kg·ha−1, which was 54.88% and 38.72% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Under W1, FD water use efficiency reached 4.36 kg/m3, 123.19% higher than ND.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- FDe0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 123.19%e0
- Comparator
- NDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“FD performed optimally under the W1 treatment: its yield reached 11,868.93 kg·ha−1, which was 54.88% and 38.72% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively; and its WUE reached 4.36 kg/m3, which was 123.19% and 100.83% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Under W1, FD water use efficiency was 100.83% higher than MD.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- FDe0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 100.83%e0
- Comparator
- MDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“FD performed optimally under the W1 treatment: its yield reached 11,868.93 kg·ha−1, which was 54.88% and 38.72% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively; and its WUE reached 4.36 kg/m3, which was 123.19% and 100.83% higher than that of ND and MD, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Under CK, ND yield reached 10,044.33 kg/ha, 27.07% higher than FD.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NDe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 27.07%e0
- Comparator
- FDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“ND performed better under the CK treatment: its yield was 10,044.33 kg·ha−1, which was 27.07% and 12.25% higher than that of FD and MD, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Under CK, ND yield was 12.25% higher than MD.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NDe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 12.25%e0
- Comparator
- MDe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“ND performed better under the CK treatment: its yield was 10,044.33 kg·ha−1, which was 27.07% and 12.25% higher than that of FD and MD, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
With 175 mm precipitation in 2023, ND showed an obvious advantage.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- ND showed an obvious advantagee0
- Qualifier
- precipitation was 175 mm in 2023e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“when precipitation was 175 mm in 2023, ND showed an obvious advantage”
Claim · model-written summary
With precipitation down to 110 mm in 2024, FD exhibited stronger stress resistance.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- FD exhibited stronger stress resistancee0
- Qualifier
- precipitation decreased to 110 mm in 2024e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“when precipitation decreased to 110 mm in 2024, FD exhibited stronger stress resistance”
Claim · model-written summary
FD is suitable for moderate to severe water stress, while ND is suitable for sufficient water or mild stress.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- FD is suitable for moderate to severe water stresse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Spring Wheat”
e0“FD is suitable for moderate to severe water stress, while ND is suitable for sufficient water conditions or mild stress”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →mulching · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
136 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
145 papers more in this group
See all 149 papers →irrigation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 177 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
238 papers more in this group
See all 242 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
299 papers more in this group
See all 303 papers →irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
985 papers more in this group
See all 989 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.