Search claims · PlantClaims

Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Infiltration sample length generally did not affect water-content and infiltration correlation.

Taxon: sorghumSorghume1
Treatment: infiltration sample lengthe0
Outcome: correlation between water content and infiltratione0
Direction: did not affecte0

Verbatim

e0
“infiltration sample length did not affect correlation between water content and infiltration.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1365–1458

e1
“Field measurements of grain sorghum fresh weight, cumulative infiltration and soil moisture complemented a theoretical development.”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 574–705

Title

Sample Volume Statistical Relations for Water Content, Infiltration, and Yield

W. W. Wallender Transactions of the ASAE 1987. doi:10.13031/2013.30518

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effectobservedreview summarypositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation agriculture generally increased water infiltration.

Treatment: CAe0
Outcome: water infiltratione0
Direction: increasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0
“CA generally increased water infiltration”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 776–817

Title

Conservation agriculture in Southern Africa: Advances in knowledge

Christian Thierfelder; Leonard Rusinamhodzi; Amos R. Ngwira; et al. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 2014. doi:10.1017/s1742170513000550

Other claims from this paper (7)

Intervention effect Conservation agriculture reduced soil erosion and runoff.
Intervention effect Conservation agriculture increased available soil moisture and deeper drainage.
Intervention effect Conservation agriculture improved physical, chemical and biological soil parameters in the medium to long term.
Intervention effect Conservation agriculture increased crop productivity.
Intervention effect Conservation agriculture reduced on-farm labor, especially with direct seeding and herbicides.
Recommendation The authors recommend adapting conservation agriculture flexibly across farming systems.
Recommendation Conservation agriculture may reduce future soil fertility decline and seasonal dry-spell effects if adoption challenges are overcome.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Glass favored water infiltration.

Outcome: water infiltratione0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“glass was in favour of water infiltration”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1084–1125

Title

Effects of Different Soil Interfaces on Apple Root Architecture and Soil Properties

Tiantian Han; Yanli Hu; Mao Zhiquan; et al. Zhongguo nongye Kexue 2012

Other claims from this paper (11)

Intervention effect Brick produced the highest root length, surface area and volume.
Intervention effect Wood was highest for root weight and average diameter.
Intervention effect Glass had the worst root indexes.
Observation Brick and wood concentrated roots in the second layer at 10-20 cm.
Observation Glass concentrated roots in the fourth layer at 30-40 cm.
Association Root activity and respiration did not positively correlate.
Observation Brick stabilized soil temperature across layers.
Observation Wood strongly adsorbed salt.
Intervention effect Brick promoted apple root length.
Intervention effect Brick increased apple root number.
Intervention effect Wood promoted secondary root structure development.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Conservation agriculture increases soil water infiltration.

Outcome: soil water infiltratione0
Direction: increasee0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“increase in soil water infiltration”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 652–687

Title

Variation of porosity, pore size distribution and soil physical properties under conservation agriculture

TRIDIV GHOSH; PRAGATI PRAMANIK MAITY; T K DAS; et al. The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences 2020. doi:10.56093/ijas.v90i11.108558

Other claims from this paper (7)

Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Improving water use efficiency, where deep infiltration losses can be reduced, depends on precision irrigation scheduling linked to infiltration rates.

Taxon: alfalfaMedicago sativat0
Outcome: water use efficiencye0

Verbatim

e0
“improving water use efficiency depends on precision irrigation scheduling linked to infiltration rates”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1487–1589

t0
“Center-Pivot Irrigated Alfalfa”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 60–90

Title

Deep Infiltration Model to Quantify Water Use Efficiency of Center-Pivot Irrigated Alfalfa

Bailey Liu; Erin Brooks; Abdelmoneim Z. Mohamed; et al. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering 2024. doi:10.1061/jidedh.ireng-10322

Other claims from this paper (5)

Observationauthor interpretationreview summarypositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Cover crops help water infiltration and runoff.

Taxon: Cover cropse0
Outcome: water infiltration and runoffe4

Verbatim

e0
“Cover crops provide many diverse assets”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–39

e4
“helps water infiltration and runoff”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 270–305

Title

Virginia Cover Crops Fact Sheet Series

Thomason, Wade E.; Fleming, Cathy VTechWorks (Virginia Tech) 2020

Other claims from this paper (7)

Observation Cover crops slow soil erosion.
Observation Cover crops make the soil more compact.
Observation Cover crops increase soil organic matter.
Observation Cover crops suppress weeds.
Observation Cover crops help decomposition.
Observation Cover crops provide insect control.
Observation Cover crops can improve the overall quality of soil and surrounding ecosystem.

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Blade cultivation had the smallest water infiltration.

Treatment: blade cultivatione0
Outcome: water infiltratione0
Direction: smalleste0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0
“The smallest water infiltration was observed in variants after blade cultivation”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 831–911

Title

IMPROVED TECHNOLOGY OF CARROT CULTIVATION UNDER DRIP IRRIGATION

Y.N. Pleskachev; O.G. Chamurliev; L.V. Gubina RUDN Journal of Agronomy and Animal Industries 2018. doi:10.22363/2312-797x-2018-13-4-360-365

Other claims from this paper (8)

Intervention effect Deep chisel plowing increased edible carrot productivity 1.25 fold relative to moldboard plowing and blade cultivation.
Intervention effect NS 30:7 fertigation increased productivity 7% relative to ammonium nitrate.
Observation Carrot yield averaged 1.25-1.32 t/m3 over 2015-2017 in soil density measurements.
Observation Deep chisel plowing had the highest water infiltration, averaging 4.2 mm/min.
Intervention effect Split ammonium nitrate and NS 30:7 fertigation increased hybrid carrot yield by 4.7-5.9 t/ha versus control.
Intervention effect NS 30:7 in all eight applications increased hybrid carrot yield by 0.5-2.4 t/ha versus control.
Observation Deep chisel plowing with split fertigation gave the highest carrot yield, averaging 90.6 t/ha in 2015-2017.
Observation Blade cultivation with ammonium nitrate fertigation gave the lowest carrot yield, 77.5 t/ha.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Living roots increased soil water infiltration.

Treatment: living rootse0
Outcome: water infiltration rates in soile0
Direction: increasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Both living roots and dead roots increased the water infiltration rates in soil”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1027–1106

Title

Influence of Living and Dead Roots of Gansu Poplar on Water Infiltration and Distribution in Soil

Dashuai Zhang; Yao Dai; Lingli Wang; et al. Applied Sciences 2020. doi:10.3390/app10103593

Other claims from this paper (12)

Intervention effect with living roots root treatment yielded 61.31 ± 0.61 steady-state water flux.
Intervention effect with dead roots root treatment yielded 55.97 ± 0.59 cm d−1 steady-state water flux.
Intervention effect Dead roots increased soil water infiltration.
Intervention effect Living roots increased soil water storage capacity.
Intervention effect Dead roots increased soil water storage capacity.
Observation Soil water storage capacity was 0.279 without roots.
Observation Soil water storage capacity was 0.317 with living roots.
Observation Soil water storage capacity was 0.322 with dead roots.
Observation Living roots contained smaller pores of 30–50 μm.
Observation Dead roots contained larger pores of 100–1000 μm.
Mechanism Channels on living root surfaces may explain increased soil permeability.
Mechanism Water absorption into dead roots increased soil water storage capacity.

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Dead roots increased soil water infiltration.

Treatment: dead rootse0
Outcome: water infiltration rates in soile0
Direction: increasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0
“Both living roots and dead roots increased the water infiltration rates in soil”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1027–1106

Title

Influence of Living and Dead Roots of Gansu Poplar on Water Infiltration and Distribution in Soil

Dashuai Zhang; Yao Dai; Lingli Wang; et al. Applied Sciences 2020. doi:10.3390/app10103593

Other claims from this paper (12)

Intervention effect with living roots root treatment yielded 61.31 ± 0.61 steady-state water flux.
Intervention effect with dead roots root treatment yielded 55.97 ± 0.59 cm d−1 steady-state water flux.
Intervention effect Living roots increased soil water infiltration.
Intervention effect Living roots increased soil water storage capacity.
Intervention effect Dead roots increased soil water storage capacity.
Observation Soil water storage capacity was 0.279 without roots.
Observation Soil water storage capacity was 0.317 with living roots.
Observation Soil water storage capacity was 0.322 with dead roots.
Observation Living roots contained smaller pores of 30–50 μm.
Observation Dead roots contained larger pores of 100–1000 μm.
Mechanism Channels on living root surfaces may explain increased soil permeability.
Mechanism Water absorption into dead roots increased soil water storage capacity.

Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water infiltration rates were higher.

Taxon: maizeZea mayst0
Outcome: water infiltration ratese4
Direction: highere4

Verbatim

t0
“Maize (Zea mays)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–62

e4
“higher water infiltration rates”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1518–1549

Title

Effect of Tillage and Weed Control Methods in Maize (Zea mays) -Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Cropping System

Dept. of Agronomy, BAU, Ranchi, Jharkhand (834 006), India; R. R. Upasani; Sheela Barla; et al. International Journal of Bio-resource and Stress Management 2017. doi:10.23910/ijbsm/2017.8.6.3c0156

Other claims from this paper (16)

Intervention effect Zero tillage in rainy and winter seasons reduced weed dry matter about as well as conventional tillage.
Intervention effect Zero tillage in rainy and winter seasons produced maize and system yield about as well as conventional tillage.
Intervention effect Conventional tillage in rainy and winter seasons (CT-CT) and in rainy season with zero tillage in winter (CT-ZT) reduced weed density and weed dry weight in wheat.
Intervention effect Conventional tillage in rainy and winter seasons (CT-CT) gave higher wheat grain yield than the rest of the tillage sequences.
Intervention effect Integrated weed management in both crops (IWM-IWM) increased maize grain yield by 51.78% over the weedy check.
Intervention effect Integrated weed management in both crops (IWM-IWM) increased net return of maize by 61.96% over the weedy check.
Intervention effect Integrated weed management in both crops (IWM-IWM) increased wheat grain yield by 18.40% over the weedy check.
Intervention effect Integrated weed management in both crops (IWM-IWM) increased net return of wheat by 17.23% over the weedy check.
Intervention effect Integrated weed management in both crops (IWM-IWM) increased system yield by 31.78% over the weedy check.
Intervention effect Integrated weed management in both crops (IWM-IWM) increased net return of the system by 34.96% over the weedy check.
Intervention effect Zero tillage with or without residue improved soil pH, organic carbon and CO 2.
Intervention effect Zero tillage with or without residue improved dehydrogenase activity in soil.
Intervention effect The recommended herbicide sequence (RH-RH) gave a significantly higher benefit-cost ratio.
Intervention effect IWM-IWM improved soil CO 2 and dehydrogenase activity relative to RH-RH sequences.
Association Long-term zero tillage farming increased weed competition.
Association Long-term zero tillage farming causes important yield losses.

“water infiltration”

Claim types

Direction of the findings

Over time

Claim type

Research area

Polarity

Statistics