Abstract
Abstract It has been reported that no‐tillage corn ( Zea mays L.) production on poorly‐drained soils results in more uneven stands and slower early growth as compared to conventional tillage methods. A field study was established in 1979 at Princeton, KY, on a Johnsburg silt loam (Aquic Fragiudults) intergrading to a Tilsit silt loam (Typic Fragiudults), to compare corn planting dates under no‐tillage (NT) and conventional tillage (CT) systems. For the NT system, a yield increase trend was observed as planting date progressed from the first planting date (late April) to the second (mid‐May). Grain yields from conventionally tilled treatments decreased with delayed planting dates. No‐tillage corn performed better than CT corn during drier growing seasons, and conventionally tilled corn produced yields equal to or slightly higher (no significant differences) for early planting dates, during years in which wet and cool climatic conditions existed during the early part of the growing season. There appears to be a greater risk associated with early planting dates for NT corn on these soils. From a management viewpoint, corn planting on these cooler soils with slow internal drainage can be delayed due to excessive wetness without substantial yield losses if NT management is used.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Under no tillage, yield trended upward from late April to mid-May planting.
- Treatment
- NT systeme0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Qualifier
- second (mid‐May)e0
- Comparator
- first planting date (late April)e0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“For the NT system, a yield increase trend was observed as planting date progressed from the first planting date (late April) to the second (mid‐May)”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventionally tilled grain yields decreased with delayed planting.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Grain yields from conventionally tilled treatments decreased with delayed planting dates”
Claim · model-written summary
No tillage performed better than conventional tillage in drier seasons.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- No‐tillagee0
- Outcome
- performed bettere0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Qualifier
- drier growing seasonse0
- Comparator
- CT corne0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No‐tillage corn performed better than CT corn during drier growing seasons”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage yielded equally or slightly more for early planting in wet cool years.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- conventionally tillede0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- equal to or slightly highere0
- Qualifier
- early planting datese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“conventionally tilled corn produced yields equal to or slightly higher (no significant differences) for early planting dates, during years in which wet and cool climatic conditions existed”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors advise delaying corn planting under no tillage on wet, slow-draining soils.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Outcome
- planting on these cooler soils with slow internal drainage can be delayede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“corn planting on these cooler soils with slow internal drainage can be delayed due to excessive wetness without substantial yield losses if NT management is used”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 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.