Paper · 2006 · Agronomy Journal

Effect of Planting Date, Clipping Height, and Cultivar on Forage and Grain Yield of Winter Wheat in Argentinean Pampas

M. J. Arzadún; J. I. Arroquy; H. E. Laborde; et al.

13
claims
24
verbatim quotes
39
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

In Argentinean Pampas, new wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) cultivars are routinely introduced to farmers for dual‐purpose production. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of planting date, clipping height on forage, and grain yield for wheat cultivars. Treatments were arranged as a 3 × 3 × 3 factorial distributed in a split‐split plot within a randomized complete block design. Main plots were planting date (March, April, and May); split‐plots were clipping height (3 cm, 7 cm, and no clipping); and split‐split plots were a facultative cultivar Pincen, and two nonfacultative cultivars Charrua and Bordenave 223 (Bve223). In 1995 and 1996 forage yield decreased in response to a delayed planting date from March to May, whereas in 1997 it was not affected by planting date. The 3‐cm clipping height yielded 21% more forage than plots clipped at 7 cm. Bve223 and Charrua produced significantly more forage than Pincen each year. Grain yield increased as planting date progressed from March to May. Clipping at 3 cm reduced grain yield compared with no clipping, while during 2 to 3 yr, 7 cm produced no significant change in grain yield compared with no clipping. In all years Bve223 produced more grain than Charrua or Pincen. Forage yield lost in response to later planting date ranged between 0 and 81% during the 3 yr; whereas grain yield increased from 40 to 190% for wheat planted in May compared with March. In conclusion, dual‐purpose wheat planted during April had both good forage and grain production, and its success was influenced by cultivars.

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 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Delaying planting from March to May reduced forage yield in 1995 and 1996.

Treatment
delayed planting date from March to Maye0
Outcome
forage yielde0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
In 1995 and 1996e0
Comparator
Marche0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 1995 and 1996 forage yield decreased in response to a delayed planting date from March to May”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 642–738 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Planting date did not affect forage yield in 1997.

Treatment
planting datee0
Outcome
forage yielde0
Direction
not affectede0
Qualifier
1997e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 1995 and 1996 forage yield decreased in response to a delayed planting date from March to May, whereas in 1997 it was not affected by planting date”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 642–792 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clipping at 3 cm yielded 21% more forage than clipping at 7 cm.

Treatment
3‐cm clipping heighte0
Outcome
foragee0
Direction
moree0
Value
21%e0
Comparator
plots clipped at 7 cme0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The 3‐cm clipping height yielded 21% more forage than plots clipped at 7 cm”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 794–869 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Bve223 produced more forage than Pincen each year.

Material
Bve223e0
Treatment
Bve223e0
Outcome
foragee0
Direction
moree0
Qualifier
each yeare0
Comparator
Pincene0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bve223 and Charrua produced significantly more forage than Pincen each year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 871–946 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Charrua produced more forage than Pincen each year.

Material
Charruae0
Treatment
Charruae0
Outcome
foragee0
Direction
moree0
Qualifier
each yeare0
Comparator
Pincene0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Bve223 and Charrua produced significantly more forage than Pincen each year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 871–946 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain yield rose as planting moved from March to May.

Treatment
planting date progressed from March to Maye0
Outcome
Grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
Marche0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Grain yield increased as planting date progressed from March to May”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 948–1015 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Clipping at 3 cm reduced grain yield compared with no clipping.

Treatment
Clipping at 3 cme0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
no clippinge0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Clipping at 3 cm reduced grain yield compared with no clipping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1079 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Clipping at 7 cm produced no significant grain-yield change versus no clipping during two to three years.

Treatment
7 cme0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
no significant changee0
Qualifier
during 2 to 3 yre0
Comparator
no clippinge0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“during 2 to 3 yr, 7 cm produced no significant change in grain yield compared with no clipping”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1087–1181 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bve223 yielded more grain than Charrua in every year.

Material
Bve223e0
Treatment
Bve223e0
Outcome
graine0
Direction
moree0
Qualifier
In all yearse0
Comparator
Charruae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In all years Bve223 produced more grain than Charrua or Pincen”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1183–1245 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bve223 yielded more grain than Pincen in every year.

Material
Bve223e0
Treatment
Bve223e0
Outcome
graine0
Direction
moree0
Qualifier
In all yearse0
Comparator
Pincene0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In all years Bve223 produced more grain than Charrua or Pincen”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1183–1245 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Later planting reduced forage yield by 0–81% over three years.

Treatment
later planting datee0
Outcome
Forage yielde0
Direction
loste0
Value
0 and 81%e0
Qualifier
during the 3 yre0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Forage yield lost in response to later planting date ranged between 0 and 81% during the 3 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1247–1340 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

May planting increased grain yield 40–190% versus March planting.

Treatment
planted in Maye0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
40 to 190%e0
Comparator
Marche0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“grain yield increased from 40 to 190% for wheat planted in May compared with March”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1350–1432 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend April planting for both forage and grain production in dual-purpose wheat.

Treatment
planted during Aprile0
Outcome
good forage and grain productione0
Qualifier
its success was influenced by cultivarse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“dual‐purpose wheat planted during April had both good forage and grain production, and its success was influenced by cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1449–1575 · show in text ↑

mechanical · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

16 papers: 5 positive, 11 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

sowing time · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

462 papers: 266 positive, 196 negative or no effect

265 papers in the same direction as this paper · 191 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. negative

458 papers more in this group

See all 462 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.