Abstract
Abstract In wheat [ Triticum aestivum (L.) Thell] producing regions with adequate frost‐free days to permit double‐cropping, water is often the most limiting factor in producing the second crop. To more fully utilize climatic resources and land after the harvest of wheat grain, a field study was conducted on a Wynona silty clay loam (Cumulic Haplaquolls) to analyze the effects of tillage and row spacings on soil water content and yields of monocropped (MC) and double‐cropped (DC) wheat and soybeans [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. Double‐cropped wheat (DCW) yielded 2,210 compared to 2,530 kg/ha for monocropped wheat (MCW). Conventional tillage double cropped soybeans (CT‐DCS) in 50‐cm rows yielded 1,610 compared to 1,460 kg/ha in 75‐cm rows. No‐tillage double‐cropped soybeans (NTDCS) in 50‐cm rows yielded 1,730 compared to 1,550 kg/ ha in 75‐cm rows. Conventional tillage monocropped soybeans (CT‐MCS) in 50‐cm rows yielded 2,010 compared to 1,880 kg/ha in 75‐cm rows. Water content in 120 cm of soil profile was not significantly affected during the soybean growing period by tillage and row spacings; however, lack of moisture in the soil‐seed environment resulted in poorer stands and lower yields for CT‐MCS in 1976. Water storage efficiency under wheat from the fully ripe stage of growth to late September averaged 28% for MCW. More grain production and more effective use of annual precipitation and soil stored water were achieved when wheat and soybeans were DC.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Double-cropped wheat yielded 2,210 versus 2,530 kg/ha for monocropped wheat.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- Double‐croppede0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Value
- 2,210e0
- Qualifier
- 2,530 kg/hae0
- Comparator
- monocropped wheate0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Double‐cropped wheat (DCW) yielded 2,210 compared to 2,530 kg/ha for monocropped wheat (MCW)”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional-till double-cropped soybeans yielded 1,610 versus 1,460 kg/ha in 50 versus 75 cm rows.
- Taxon
- soybeans
Glycine maxe0 - Treatment
- 50‐cm rowse0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Value
- 1,610e0
- Qualifier
- 1,460 kg/hae0
- Comparator
- 75‐cm rowse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Conventional tillage double cropped soybeans (CT‐DCS) in 50‐cm rows yielded 1,610 compared to 1,460 kg/ha in 75‐cm rows”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till double-cropped soybeans yielded 1,730 versus 1,550 kg/ha in 50 versus 75 cm rows.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- 50‐cm rowse0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Value
- 1,730e0
- Qualifier
- 1,550 kg/ hae0
- Comparator
- 75‐cm rowse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No‐tillage double‐cropped soybeans (NTDCS) in 50‐cm rows yielded 1,730 compared to 1,550 kg/ ha in 75‐cm rows”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional-till monocropped soybeans yielded 2,010 versus 1,880 kg/ha in 50 versus 75 cm rows.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- 50‐cm rowse0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Value
- 2,010e0
- Qualifier
- 1,880 kg/hae0
- Comparator
- 75‐cm rowse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Conventional tillage monocropped soybeans (CT‐MCS) in 50‐cm rows yielded 2,010 compared to 1,880 kg/ha in 75‐cm rows”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage and row spacing did not significantly affect soil water content during soybean growth.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- tillage and row spacingse0
- Outcome
- Water content in 120 cm of soil profilee0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water content in 120 cm of soil profile was not significantly affected during the soybean growing period by tillage and row spacings”
Claim · model-written summary
Low seed-zone moisture produced poorer stands and lower yields for conventional-till monocropped soybeans in 1976.
- Taxon
- soybeansGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- lack of moisture in the soil‐seed environmente0
- Outcome
- poorer stands and lower yieldse0
- Direction
- poorere0
- Qualifier
- in 1976e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“lack of moisture in the soil‐seed environment resulted in poorer stands and lower yields for CT‐MCS in 1976”
t0“Double and Monocropped Wheat and Soybeans Under Different Tillage and Row Spacings1”
Claim · model-written summary
Water storage efficiency under monocropped wheat averaged 28%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- fully ripe stage of growthe0
- Outcome
- Water storage efficiencye0
- Value
- 28%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water storage efficiency under wheat from the fully ripe stage of growth to late September averaged 28% for MCW”
Claim · model-written summary
Double cropping improved grain production and use of precipitation and stored water.
- Taxon
- wheat and soybeansGlycine maxTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- DCe0
- Outcome
- grain production and more effective use of annual precipitation and soil stored watere0
- Direction
- Moree0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“More grain production and more effective use of annual precipitation and soil stored water were achieved when wheat and soybeans were DC”
The same questions in other papers
climate site · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
36 papers in the same direction as this paper · 36 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
69 papers more in this group
See all 73 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 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.