Abstract
Contour perennial buffers within cropland reduce pollutants from watersheds, but may interfere and affect crop yields at the crop‐buffer interface. The objective of this study was to evaluate the temporal and spatial effects of agroforestry (AGF) and contour grass (CGS) buffers on no‐till corn ( Zea mays L.) and soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.] yields in the claypan region of Missouri. The CGS buffers (4.5‐m width) contained redtop ( Agrostis gigantean Roth), brome grass ( Bromus spp.), and birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.), established at 35 m spacings. The AGF buffers contained, a single row of pin oak ( Quercus palustris Muenchh.), swamp white oak ( Q. bicolor Willd.), and bur oak ( Q. macrocarpa Michx.) trees planted at 3‐m spacings in the middle of grass strips. Mean yields of corn in 2004, 2006, and 2008 and soybean in 2005, 2007, and 2009 at distances 0 to 5 m, 5 to 10 m, 10 to 15 m, and 15 to 20 m from AGF and CGS buffers were determined using geo‐referenced yield maps and ArcGIS software. Corn yield reductions at 0 to 5 m from buffers, ranged from 22 to 49% in AGF and 15 to 32% in CGS watersheds, compared to the yield at 15 to 20 m during 2004 and 2006. This reduction may have been enhanced from soil moisture stress, late planting, and different hybrids between study years. Soybean yields were not affected by buffers. Reduction of corn yields could be potentially minimized with early planting, drought‐tolerant varieties and reduction of buffers root competition with pruning or barriers.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Corn yield 0–5 m from agroforestry buffers was reduced 22–49% relative to 15–20 m in 2004 and 2006.
- Taxon
- Corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Outcome
- Corn yielde0
- Direction
- reductionse0
- Value
- 22 to 49%e0
- Qualifier
- 0 to 5 m from bufferse0
- Comparator
- yield at 15 to 20 me0
- Setting
- AGFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn yield reductions at 0 to 5 m from buffers, ranged from 22 to 49% in AGF and 15 to 32% in CGS watersheds, compared to the yield at 15 to 20 m during 2004 and 2006.”
Claim · model-written summary
Corn yield 0–5 m from contour grass buffers was reduced 15–32% relative to 15–20 m in 2004 and 2006.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- Corn yielde0
- Direction
- reductionse0
- Value
- 15 to 32%e0
- Comparator
- yield at 15 to 20 me0
- Setting
- CGS watershedse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Corn yield reductions at 0 to 5 m from buffers, ranged from 22 to 49% in AGF and 15 to 32% in CGS watersheds, compared to the yield at 15 to 20 m during 2004 and 2006.”
Claim · model-written summary
Soybean yields were unaffected by buffers.
- Taxon
- Soybean
Glycine maxe0 - Outcome
- Soybean yieldse0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soybean yields were not affected by buffers.”
Claim · model-written summary
Early planting, drought-tolerant varieties and root pruning or barriers could minimize corn yield loss near buffers.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- Reduction of corn yields could be potentially minimizede0
- Qualifier
- early planting, drought‐tolerant varieties and reduction of buffers root competition with pruning or barrierse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduction of corn yields could be potentially minimized with early planting, drought‐tolerant varieties and reduction of buffers root competition with pruning or barriers.”