Abstract
Nine rotations of fallow (F), wheat (W), barley (B), canola (C) and alfalfa hay (H) were evaluated to determine whether alternating crops in rotation on Dark Brown soils increases yield or reduces yield variability. Enhanced yield could increase economic returns, while reduced yield variability could reduce risk of economic loss in individual years. Rotations used in the study were F–W, F–C, F–W–W, F–C–W, F–W–B, F–C–B, F–C–B–H, F–C–W–B–H–H, and continuous wheat. Rotation did not affect yield of wheat or canola grown on summerfallow. Yield and quality of wheat and barley grown on stubble were influenced by rotation. Wheat yield on wheat stubble averaged 1980 and 2160 kg ha −1 in the continuous wheat and F–W–W rotations, respectively, while wheat on canola stubble averaged 2340 and 2290 kg ha −1 in the F–C–W and F–C–W–B–H–H rotations. Most of the yield reduction with wheat on wheat stubble occurred during 1987–1991, when pre-seeding tillage on stubble was minimized. Leaf disease (tan spot and septoria) increased noticeably on wheat stubble during 1987–1991 compared with 1980–1986 or with wheat on canola stubble. Presumably, reduced tillage during 1987–1991 left more infected residue on the soil surface, where it could infect a succeeding wheat crop. Yield of canola relative to wheat during 1980–1991 was much higher than reported for this study during 1972–1979; this was likely due to better seedbed preparation and more effective weed control. Coefficients of variability (CV) for yield over years were 20–25% for canola; 27–30% for wheat on fallow; 24–31% for wheat on stubble; 23–34% for barley on stubble; and 51–63% for alfalfa hay. Calculated on a rotation basis, CV tended to be high in wheat monoculture rotations, particularly where summerfallow was eliminated, but tended to be lower where a mix of crops was grown. Implications for more widespread acceptance of extended cropping are discussed. Key words: Crop rotation, wheat, barley, canola, alfalfa, rotation effect, yield variability
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Rotation did not affect wheat yield on summerfallow.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- Rotatione0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rotation did not affect yield of wheat or canola grown on summerfallow”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotation did not affect canola yield on summerfallow.
- Taxon
- canola
.jpg?width=60)
Brassica napus var. napuse0 - Treatment
- Rotatione0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Rotation did not affect yield of wheat or canola grown on summerfallow”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotation influenced yield and quality of wheat grown on stubble.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- rotatione0
- Outcome
- Yield and qualitye0
- Direction
- influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield and quality of wheat and barley grown on stubble were influenced by rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotation influenced yield and quality of barley grown on stubble.
- Taxon
- barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgaree0 - Treatment
- rotatione0
- Outcome
- Yield and qualitye0
- Direction
- influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Yield and quality of wheat and barley grown on stubble were influenced by rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield on wheat stubble averaged 1980 kg ha −1 under continuous wheat.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- continuous wheate0
- Outcome
- Wheat yielde0
- Value
- 1980e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat yield on wheat stubble averaged 1980 and 2160 kg ha −1 in the continuous wheat and F–W–W rotations, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield on wheat stubble averaged 2160 kg ha −1 under F–W–W rotation.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- F–W–W rotationse0
- Outcome
- Wheat yielde0
- Value
- 2160 kg ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat yield on wheat stubble averaged 1980 and 2160 kg ha −1 in the continuous wheat and F–W–W rotations, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield on canola stubble averaged 2340 kg ha −1 under F–C–W rotation.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- F–C–We0
- Outcome
- wheat on canola stubblee0
- Value
- 2340e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wheat on canola stubble averaged 2340 and 2290 kg ha −1 in the F–C–W and F–C–W–B–H–H rotations”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield on canola stubble averaged 2290 kg ha −1 under F–C–W–B–H–H rotation.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- F–C–W–B–H–H rotationse0
- Outcome
- wheat on canola stubblee0
- Value
- 2290 kg ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wheat on canola stubble averaged 2340 and 2290 kg ha −1 in the F–C–W and F–C–W–B–H–H rotations”
Claim · model-written summary
Most wheat yield reduction on wheat stubble occurred during 1987–1991 with minimized pre-seeding tillage.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- pre-seeding tillage on stubble was minimizede0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Setting
- 1987–1991e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Most of the yield reduction with wheat on wheat stubble occurred during 1987–1991, when pre-seeding tillage on stubble was minimized”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat leaf disease increased on wheat stubble during 1987–1991 compared with earlier years or canola stubble.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- Leaf disease (tan spot and septoria)e0
- Direction
- increased noticeablye0
- Comparator
- 1980–1986 or with wheat on canola stubblee0
- Setting
- wheat stubblee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaf disease (tan spot and septoria) increased noticeably on wheat stubble during 1987–1991 compared with 1980–1986 or with wheat on canola stubble”
Claim · model-written summary
Canola yield relative to wheat was higher in 1980–1991 than reported for 1972–1979.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Direction
- much highere0
- Comparator
- wheate0
- Setting
- 1980–1991e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield of canola relative to wheat during 1980–1991 was much higher than reported for this study during 1972–1979”
Claim · model-written summary
Canola yield CV over years was 20–25%.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Outcome
- Coefficients of variability (CV) for yielde0
- Value
- 20–25%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Coefficients of variability (CV) for yield over years were 20–25% for canola”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield CV on fallow was 27–30%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- wheat on fallowe0
- Value
- 27–30%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“27–30% for wheat on fallow”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield CV on stubble was 24–31%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- wheat on stubblee0
- Value
- 24–31%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“24–31% for wheat on stubble”
Claim · model-written summary
Barley yield CV on stubble was 23–34%.
- Taxon
- barleyHordeum vulgaree0
- Outcome
- barley on stubblee0
- Value
- 23–34%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“23–34% for barley on stubble”
Claim · model-written summary
Alfalfa hay yield CV was 51–63%.
Verbatim
e0“51–63% for alfalfa hay”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield CV tended to be high in wheat monoculture rotations, especially without summerfallow.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- wheat monoculture rotationse0
- Outcome
- CVe0
- Direction
- highe0
- Qualifier
- particularly where summerfallow was eliminatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CV tended to be high in wheat monoculture rotations, particularly where summerfallow was eliminated”
The same questions in other papers
rotation · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →rotation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
91 papers in the same direction as this paper · 253 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
341 papers more in this group
See all 345 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.