Paper · 1970 · The Journal of Agricultural Science

The effect of sowing date and harvesting date on the yield of sugar beet

R. Hull; D. J. Webb

9
claims
18
verbatim quotes
35
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

SUMMARY A field experiment in each year 1963 to 1967 in Suffolk, England, tested the effect on yield of sugar beet of sowing dates ranging from 13 March to 11 May and harvest dates ranging from 20 September to 8 December. Sowings in March or early April gave similar yields of sugar but with later sowings yield decreased progressively faster. The relationship is represented by the equation y = 106·3 (±2·24) + 0·212 (±0·184) x -0·009 (±0·003) x 2 , y = yield as percentage of mean (60·1 cwt/acre of sugar), x = number of days after 12 March. Delayed harvest increased sugar yield; the relationship is represented by the equation y = 80·22 (±1·51) + 0·836 (±0·09) z -0·006 (±0·001) z 2 , z = number of days after 19 September. This represents an increase of 0·247 cwt/acre/day of sugar in October and 0·083 cwt/acre/day in November, equivalent to about 2½ tons/acre of roots in October and 1 ton/acre in November. The effect on sugar yield of different lengths of growing period, which ranged from 138 to 271 days, is represented by the equation y = 38·7 (±26·6) + 1·045 (±0·267) a -0·0017 (±0·0007) a 2 , a = number of days between sowing and harvest. On average, sowing date had negligible effect on sugar percentage at harvest. In 3 years sugar percentage increased after the first harvest to a maximum and then decreased; in 2 years it decreased with consecutive harvests.

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 resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

March and early April sowings gave similar sugar yields.

Treatment
Sowings in March or early Aprile0
Outcome
yields of sugare0
Direction
similare0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“Sowings in March or early April gave similar yields of sugar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 222–282 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Later sowing progressively decreased sugar yield.

Treatment
later sowingse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“with later sowings yield decreased progressively faster”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 287–342 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Delayed harvest increased sugar yield.

Treatment
Delayed harveste0
Outcome
sugar yielde0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“Delayed harvest increased sugar yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–581 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar yield increased by 0·247 cwt/acre/day in October.

Outcome
sugare0
Direction
increasee0
Value
0·247 cwt/acre/daye0
Qualifier
Octobere0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“increase of 0·247 cwt/acre/day of sugar in October”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–797 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar yield increased by 0·083 cwt/acre/day in November.

Outcome
sugare0
Direction
increasee0
Value
0·083 cwt/acre/daye0
Qualifier
Novembere0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“This represents an increase of 0·247 cwt/acre/day of sugar in October and 0·083 cwt/acre/day in November”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 728–832 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Growing period length was related to sugar yield.

Treatment
different lengths of growing periode0
Outcome
sugar yielde0
Value
138 to 271 dayse0

Not reportedDirection

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“effect on sugar yield of different lengths of growing period, which ranged from 138 to 271 days”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 919–1014 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sowing date had negligible effect on sugar percentage at harvest.

Treatment
sowing datee0
Outcome
sugar percentage at harveste0
Direction
negligible effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“sowing date had negligible effect on sugar percentage at harvest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1166–1230 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In three years sugar percentage increased after first harvest and then decreased.

Outcome
sugar percentagee0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
In 3 yearse0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“In 3 years sugar percentage increased after the first harvest to a maximum and then decreased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1232–1325 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In two years sugar percentage decreased with consecutive harvests.

Outcome
sugart0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
in 2 yearse0

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–72 · show in text ↑
e0

“in 2 years it decreased with consecutive harvests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1327–1376 · show in text ↑

sowing time · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

26 papers: 20 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 papers →

stage · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 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.