Paper · 1965 · Agronomy Journal

Effect of Planting Date on Seed Yield, Oil Content, and Water Requirement of Safflower1

R. E. Luebs; D. M. Yermanos; A. E. Laag; et al.

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
7
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Synopsis Yields of irrigated safflower decreased between 150 and 300 pounds per acre for each 4‐ to 6‐week delay in planting from January 16 to April 23. Seed weight, hull content, linoleic acid content, and iodine values of the oil decreased in the later plantings, while oil content of seed increased. Total irrigation requirements for January, February, and March plantings were similar. Average consumptive moisture use was 34.4 inches, and the peak average daily moisture use was 0.39 inch.

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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Each 4 to 6 week delay in planting reduced irrigated safflower yield by 150 to 300 pounds per acre.

Treatment
4‐ to 6‐week delay in plantinge0
Outcome
Yieldse0
Direction
decreasede0
Value
150 and 300 pounds per acree0
Comparator
January 16e0

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yields of irrigated safflower decreased between 150 and 300 pounds per acre for each 4‐ to 6‐week delay in planting from January 16 to April 23”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–152 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Later planting reduced seed weight.

Treatment
later plantingse0
Outcome
Seed weighte0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed weight, hull content, linoleic acid content, and iodine values of the oil decreased in the later plantings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 154–265 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Later planting reduced hull content.

Treatment
later plantingse0
Outcome
hull contente0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed weight, hull content, linoleic acid content, and iodine values of the oil decreased in the later plantings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 154–265 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Later planting reduced linoleic acid content.

Treatment
later plantingse0
Outcome
linoleic acid contente0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed weight, hull content, linoleic acid content, and iodine values of the oil decreased in the later plantings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 154–265 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Later planting reduced iodine values of the oil.

Treatment
later plantingse0
Outcome
iodine values of the oile0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Seed weight, hull content, linoleic acid content, and iodine values of the oil decreased in the later plantings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 154–265 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Later planting increased seed oil content.

Treatment
later plantingse1
Outcome
oil content of seede0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“oil content of seed increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 273–302 · show in text ↑
e1

“in the later plantings”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 243–265 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total irrigation requirements were similar for January, February, and March plantings.

Outcome
Total irrigation requirementse0
Direction
similare0
Qualifier
January, February, and March plantingse0

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Total irrigation requirements for January, February, and March plantings were similar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 304–389 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Average consumptive moisture use was 34.4 inches.

Outcome
Average consumptive moisture usee0
Value
34.4 inchese0

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Average consumptive moisture use was 34.4 inches”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 391–439 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Peak average daily moisture use was 0.39 inch.

Outcome
peak average daily moisture usee0
Value
0.39 inche0

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

Carthamus tinctorius
Carthamus tinctorius · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the peak average daily moisture use was 0.39 inch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 445–494 · show in text ↑
t0

“Safflower”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 77–86 · show in text ↑

sowing time · yield · Carthamus tinctorius (safflower)Positive and negative results

34 papers: 24 positive, 10 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

30 papers more in this group

See all 34 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.