Abstract
Organic grain system managers have to find solutions to nitrogen deficiency and weed infestation. It is especially true when no animals are present on the farm to justify the use of forage legumes despite their interests in the crop succession. Our study focused on the role of four legume cover crop species inserted in a succession of winter wheat and maize on both problems. This insertion consisted in relay-intercropping the legumes under the canopy of wheat. Cover crops were maintained on the field after the harvest of the cereal until the sowing of the subsequent maize crop. The performance of the three crops of the succession was monitored as well as weed development and nitrogen dynamic in the soil-plant system. On the one hand, our results showed that black medic and red clover, that supported the best the competition of wheat, were likely to decrease its grain protein content at harvest (-0.3 to 0.4 %). On the other hand, the four species did not decrease intercropped wheat grain yield. They were able to control weed infestation during the intercropping period and between the two cash crops. Finally, nitrogen restitution to the subsequent maize crop was efficient and allowed a significant 30 % increase of maize grain yield.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Black medic and red clover were likely to reduce wheat grain protein content by 0.3 to 0.4%.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- black medic and red clovere0
- Outcome
- grain protein contente0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Value
- -0.3 to 0.4 %e0
- Qualifier
- were likely toe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“black medic and red clover, that supported the best the competition of wheat, were likely to decrease its grain protein content at harvest (-0.3 to 0.4 %)”
t0“blé / légumineuse fourragère”
Claim · model-written summary
The four legume species did not decrease intercropped wheat grain yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- the four speciese0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- did not decreasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the four species did not decrease intercropped wheat grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The legume cover crops controlled weed infestation during wheat intercropping.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- weed infestatione0
- Direction
- controle0
- Qualifier
- during the intercropping periode0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On the other hand, the four species did not decrease intercropped wheat grain yield. They were able to control weed infestation during the intercropping period and between the two cash crops”
Claim · model-written summary
The legume cover crops controlled weed infestation between the two cash crops.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator
Verbatim
e0“They were able to control weed infestation during the intercropping period and between the two cash crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen restitution from legume cover crops significantly increased subsequent maize grain yield by 30%.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“nitrogen restitution to the subsequent maize crop was efficient and allowed a significant 30 % increase of maize grain yield”
The same questions in other papers
Trifolium pratense · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
nitrogen · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1,905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 234 in the opposite direction · 45 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
2,181 papers more in this group
See all 2,185 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.