Abstract
Management of legume cover crops to reduce their cost by using no-tillage and reducing seed rate could increase their adoption. Despite the growing interest in cover crops, no information exists simultaneously regarding the potential of different species and how the sowing method and seed rate affect nitrogen (N) contribution and the yield of the subsequent maize crop. During a four-year field trial, under irrigated conditions in the Ebro valley (NE Spain), three leguminous cover crop species (pea, common vetch and hairy vetch), two cover crop seeding methods (conventional tillage and no-tillage) and two seeding rates (normal and 25% reduced) were tested and compared with a control treatment without a cover crop. The aboveground cover crop biomass and the N derived from biological fixation (BNF); aboveground biomass and total N in weeds; soil mineral nitrogen; and the effect on maize grain yield and N content were evaluated. Pea and common vetch produced more biomass (+76%) and had a higher N uptake (+50 to 60%) compared to hairy vetch. The sowing of the cover crops after no-tillage combined with a reduced sowing rate reduced biomass production by 14%. The percentage of nitrogen derived from the atmosphere (Ndfa) was above 60% for all species and the differences in total N derived from biological fixation (BNF) among treatments were related to the aboveground biomass. The introduction of cover crops reduced weed growth compared to the control especially in the no-tillage treatment. Cover crops increased maize grain yield by 12% and N uptake by 17% compared to the control treatment without a cover crop.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Pea produced more biomass than hairy vetch.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pea and common vetch produced more biomass (+76%)”
e1“compared to hairy vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
Common vetch produced more biomass than hairy vetch.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Vicia_sativa.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Pea and common vetch produced more biomass (+76%)”
e1“compared to hairy vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
Pea had higher nitrogen uptake than hairy vetch.
- Taxon
- Pea
Lathyrus oleraceuse0 - Outcome
- N uptakee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- +50 to 60%e0
- Comparator
- hairy vetche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pea and common vetch produced more biomass (+76%) and had a higher N uptake (+50 to 60%) compared to hairy vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
Common vetch had higher nitrogen uptake than hairy vetch.
- Taxon
- common vetch
_Vicia_sativa.jpg?width=60)
Vicia sativae0 - Outcome
- N uptakee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- +50 to 60%e0
- Comparator
- hairy vetche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pea and common vetch produced more biomass (+76%) and had a higher N uptake (+50 to 60%) compared to hairy vetch”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage with reduced sowing rate reduced cover crop biomass by 14%.
- Taxon
- cover cropse0
- Treatment
- no-tillage combined with a reduced sowing ratee0
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 14%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The sowing of the cover crops after no-tillage combined with a reduced sowing rate reduced biomass production by 14%”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen derived from the atmosphere exceeded 60% for all cover crop species.
Verbatim
e0“The percentage of nitrogen derived from the atmosphere (Ndfa) was above 60% for all species”
t0“Legume Cover Crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Differences in total biologically fixed nitrogen among cover crop treatments were related to aboveground biomass.
- Taxon
- Legume Cover Cropt0
- Treatment
- treatmentse0
- Outcome
- total N derived from biological fixation (BNF)e0
- Qualifier
- related to the aboveground biomasse0
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“differences in total N derived from biological fixation (BNF) among treatments were related to the aboveground biomass”
t0“Legume Cover Crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crops reduced weed growth compared with no cover crop.
- Treatment
- introduction of cover cropse0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed growthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- controle0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The introduction of cover crops reduced weed growth compared to the control especially in the no-tillage treatment”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crops increased maize grain yield by 12% versus no cover crop.
- Treatment
- Cover cropse0
- Outcome
- maize grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 12%e0
- Comparator
- control treatment without a cover crope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cover crops increased maize grain yield by 12% and N uptake by 17% compared to the control treatment without a cover crop”
Claim · model-written summary
Cover crops increased maize nitrogen uptake by 17% versus no cover crop.
- Treatment
- Cover cropse0
- Outcome
- N uptakee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 17%e0
- Comparator
- control treatment without a cover crope0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cover crops increased maize grain yield by 12% and N uptake by 17% compared to the control treatment without a cover crop”
The same questions in other papers
cover crop · weed · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →cover crop · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →cover crop · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
103 papers in the same direction as this paper · 104 in the opposite direction · 14 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
218 papers more in this group
See all 222 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.