Paper · 2012 · Open Journal of Soil Science

Relative Effectiveness of Various Amendments in Improving Yield and Nutrient Uptake under Organic Crop Production

Sukhdev S. Malhi

9
claims
10
verbatim quotes
15
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

In organic farming, artificial/synthetic inorganic fertilizers/chemicals are not applied to increase crop yields, but adequate amounts of nutrients are essential for sustainable high production from agricultural crops. Two 3-year (2008 - wheat, 2009 – pea, and 2010 - barley) field experiments were conducted on certified organic farms near Spalding (Dark Brown Chernozem – Typic Haploboroll) and Star City (Gray Luvisol – Typic Haplocryalf) in northeastern Saskatche-wan to determine the relative effectiveness of various organic amendments (compost, alfalfa pellets, wood ash, rock phosphate, Penicillium bilaiae, MykePro, or gypsum), and intercropping of non-legume (wheat, barley) and legume (pea) annual crops on seed yield, total biomass yield (TBY) and nutrient uptake in seed + straw of wheat, pea and barley. In 2008, seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptake of wheat increased (but small) with compost and alfalfa pellets. In 2010, seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptake of barley increased substantially with compost and alfalfa pellets and moderately with wood ash. Other amendments had little or no effect on crop yield and nutrient uptake. In 2009, there was no beneficial effect of any amendment on yield and nutrient uptake of pea, most likely due to fixation of N which is the most limiting nutrient in these soils. Intercropping of wheat or barley with pea produced greater seed yield and nutrient uptake per unit land area basis compared to wheat or barley grown as sole crops in most cases. In conclusion, our results suggest potential benefits in improving yield and nutrient uptake of wheat and barley from compost, alfalfa pellets and possibly wood ash, most likely by preventing deficiencies of some nutrients, especially N, lacking in these soils under organic farming. Our findings also suggest the need for future research to determine the feasibility of rock phosphate, Penicillium bilaiae, MykePro, gypsum or other amendments in preventing P and/or S deficiency in organic crops using soils extremely deficient in these nutrients.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Compost slightly increased wheat yield, biomass and nutrient uptake in 2008.

Treatment
composte0
Outcome
seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptakee0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
but smalle0

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 2008, seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptake of wheat increased (but small) with compost and alfalfa pellets”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 818–926 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Alfalfa pellets slightly increased wheat yield, biomass and nutrient uptake in 2008.

Treatment
alfalfa pelletse0
Outcome
seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptakee0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
but smalle0

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 2008, seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptake of wheat increased (but small) with compost and alfalfa pellets”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 818–926 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Compost substantially increased barley yield, biomass and nutrient uptake in 2010.

Treatment
composte0
Outcome
seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptakee0
Direction
increased substantiallye0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2010, seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptake of barley increased substantially with compost and alfalfa pellets and moderately with wood ash”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 928–1068 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Alfalfa pellets substantially increased barley yield, biomass and nutrient uptake in 2010.

Treatment
alfalfa pelletse0
Outcome
seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptakee0
Direction
increased substantiallye0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2010, seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptake of barley increased substantially with compost and alfalfa pellets and moderately with wood ash”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 928–1068 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wood ash moderately increased barley yield, biomass and nutrient uptake in 2010.

Treatment
wood ashe0
Outcome
seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptakee0
Direction
moderatelye0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2010, seed yield, TBY and nutrient uptake of barley increased substantially with compost and alfalfa pellets and moderately with wood ash”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 928–1068 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Other amendments had little or no effect on yield and nutrient uptake.

Treatment
Other amendmentse0
Outcome
crop yield and nutrient uptakee0
Direction
little or no effecte0

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

“Other amendments had little or no effect on crop yield and nutrient uptake”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1070–1144 · show in text ↑
t0

“nutrient uptake of wheat increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 847–881 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

No amendment benefited pea yield or nutrient uptake in 2009.

Treatment
any amendmente0
Outcome
yield and nutrient uptakee0
Direction
no beneficial effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lathyrus oleraceus
Lathyrus oleraceus · TaxonRenee Comet (photographer) AV Number: AV-9400-4164 · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2009, there was no beneficial effect of any amendment on yield and nutrient uptake of pea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1146–1238 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping wheat with pea usually increased seed yield and nutrient uptake per unit area relative to sole wheat.

Treatment
Intercropping of wheat or barley with peae0
Outcome
seed yield and nutrient uptake per unit land area basise0
Direction
greatere0
Qualifier
in most casese0
Comparator
wheat or barley grown as sole cropse0

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

“Intercropping of wheat or barley with pea produced greater seed yield and nutrient uptake per unit land area basis compared to wheat or barley grown as sole crops in most cases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1325–1501 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Intercropping barley with pea usually increased seed yield and nutrient uptake per unit area relative to sole barley.

Treatment
Intercropping of wheat or barley with peae0
Outcome
seed yield and nutrient uptake per unit land area basise0
Direction
greatere0
Qualifier
in most casese0
Comparator
wheat or barley grown as sole cropse0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Intercropping of wheat or barley with pea produced greater seed yield and nutrient uptake per unit land area basis compared to wheat or barley grown as sole crops in most cases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1325–1501 · show in text ↑

Medicago sativa · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 4 positive, 2 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

Triticum aestivum · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 10 positive, 5 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

Hordeum vulgare · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

23 papers: 10 positive, 13 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 papers →

Medicago sativa · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

38 papers: 27 positive, 11 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

34 papers more in this group

See all 38 papers →

intercropping · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results differ

49 papers: 36 positive, 13 negative or no effect

35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

45 papers more in this group

See all 49 papers →

intercropping · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

189 papers: 131 positive, 58 negative or no effect

130 papers in the same direction as this paper · 51 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

185 papers more in this group

See all 189 papers →

other · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results

25 papers: 23 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

21 papers more in this group

See all 25 papers →

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

223 papers: 206 positive, 17 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 206 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

219 papers more in this group

See all 223 papers →

8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.