Abstract
Abstract Because of the extreme climatic differences between their regions, farmers in southern Texas and northern Mexico have been reluctant to adopt conservation tillage systems developed in the north‐central or midwestern United States. With greater knowledge of the benefits and risks of conservation tillage practices under a semiarid, subtropical environment, producers can make better decisions regarding tillage practices. The objectives of this study were to compare the effects of conventional and conservation tillage on corn ( Zea mays L.) yields and production costs during the transition from conventional to reduced tillage and provide farmers with guidelines for implementing conservation tillage in a subtropical, semiarid environment through evaluation of grain yield and production economics as affected by tillage. Conventional tillage (CT), reduced tillage with wide V‐sweeps (RT), and preplant no‐tillage (PPNT) were compared for both spring and fall corn production over three years. Grain yields for PPNT were lower than CT in the spring (−9%) and fall (−20%) of the first cropping year. Yields in PPNT were equivalent or up to 12% greater than CT yields in Years 2 and 3. Production costs were lower in the PPNT than in the CT, because of the reduced number of tillage trips over the field. A three‐year average of net returns for corn grown in the PPNT spring treatment was $47 ha −1 greater than RT, and $104 ha −1 more than the CT systems. Average fall corn net returns over three years for the PPNT were $5 ha −1 more than RT and $104 ha −1 more than CT systems. Average net returns from PPNT for spring and fall cropping seasons over three years was $23 ha −1 greater than the RT and $104 ha −1 greater than CT. Greater economic returns and lower production costs of PPNT compared with CT systems for all seasons and years were the result of reduced energy and operator time requirements. The conservation tillage systems (RT and PPNT) resulted in greater economic returns, compared with a CT tillage system, due to both greater yields in dry years and lower production costs in all years.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
In the first cropping year, spring corn yield under PPNT was 9% lower than under CT.
- Taxon
- Corn
Zea mays subsp. mayst0 - Treatment
- PPNTe1
- Outcome
- Grain yieldse1
- Direction
- lowere1
- Value
- −9%e1
- Qualifier
- springe1
- Comparator
- CTe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e1“Grain yields for PPNT were lower than CT in the spring (−9%) and fall (−20%) of the first cropping year”
Claim · model-written summary
In the first cropping year, fall corn yield under PPNT was 20% lower than under CT.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- PPNTe1
- Outcome
- Grain yieldse1
- Direction
- lowere1
- Value
- −20%e1
- Qualifier
- falle1
- Comparator
- CTe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e1“Grain yields for PPNT were lower than CT in the spring (−9%) and fall (−20%) of the first cropping year”
Claim · model-written summary
In years 2 and 3, PPNT yields were equivalent to or up to 12% greater than CT yields.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- PPNTe2
- Outcome
- Yieldse2
- Direction
- greatere2
- Value
- up to 12%e2
- Qualifier
- Years 2 and 3e2
- Comparator
- CTe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e2“Yields in PPNT were equivalent or up to 12% greater than CT yields in Years 2 and 3”
Claim · model-written summary
Production costs were lower under PPNT than under CT because of fewer tillage trips.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- PPNTe3
- Outcome
- Production costse3
- Direction
- lowere3
- Qualifier
- because of the reduced number of tillage trips over the fielde3
- Comparator
- CTe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e3“Production costs were lower in the PPNT than in the CT, because of the reduced number of tillage trips over the field”
Claim · model-written summary
Three-year average spring net returns under PPNT were $47 ha−1 greater than under RT.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- PPNT spring treatmente4
- Outcome
- net returnse4
- Direction
- greatere4
- Value
- $47 ha −1e4
- Comparator
- RTe4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e4“net returns for corn grown in the PPNT spring treatment was $47 ha −1 greater than RT, and $104 ha −1 more than the CT systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Three-year average spring net returns under PPNT were $104 ha−1 more than under CT.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- PPNT spring treatmente4
- Outcome
- net returnse4
- Direction
- moree4
- Value
- $104 ha −1e4
- Comparator
- CT systemse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e4“net returns for corn grown in the PPNT spring treatment was $47 ha −1 greater than RT, and $104 ha −1 more than the CT systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Three-year average fall net returns under PPNT were $5 ha−1 more than under RT.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- the PPNTe5
- Outcome
- fall corn net returnse5
- Direction
- moree5
- Value
- $5 ha −1e5
- Comparator
- RTe5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e5“Average fall corn net returns over three years for the PPNT were $5 ha −1 more than RT and $104 ha −1 more than CT systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Three-year average fall net returns under PPNT were $104 ha−1 more than under CT.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- the PPNTe5
- Outcome
- fall corn net returnse5
- Direction
- moree5
- Value
- $104 ha −1e5
- Comparator
- CT systemse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e5“Average fall corn net returns over three years for the PPNT were $5 ha −1 more than RT and $104 ha −1 more than CT systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Average spring and fall net returns under PPNT were $23 ha−1 greater than under RT.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- PPNTe6
- Outcome
- Average net returnse6
- Direction
- greatere6
- Value
- $23 ha −1e6
- Comparator
- the RTe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e6“Average net returns from PPNT for spring and fall cropping seasons over three years was $23 ha −1 greater than the RT and $104 ha −1 greater than CT”
Claim · model-written summary
Average spring and fall net returns under PPNT were $104 ha−1 greater than under CT.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- PPNTe6
- Outcome
- Average net returnse6
- Direction
- greatere6
- Value
- $104 ha −1e6
- Comparator
- CTe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e6“Average net returns from PPNT for spring and fall cropping seasons over three years was $23 ha −1 greater than the RT and $104 ha −1 greater than CT”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation tillage systems (RT and PPNT) gave greater economic returns than conventional tillage, due to greater dry-year yields and lower costs.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- conservation tillage systems (RT and PPNT)e7
- Outcome
- economic returnse7
- Direction
- greatere7
- Qualifier
- due to both greater yields in dry yearse7
- Comparator
- CT tillage systeme7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e7“The conservation tillage systems (RT and PPNT) resulted in greater economic returns, compared with a CT tillage system, due to both greater yields in dry years”
Claim · model-written summary
Greater economic returns and lower production costs of PPNT were the result of reduced energy and operator time requirements.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Outcome
- Greater economic returnse7
- Qualifier
- reduced energy and operator time requirementse7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Conservation Tillage Corn Production”
e7“Greater economic returns and lower production costs of PPNT compared with CT systems for all seasons and years were the result of reduced energy and operator time requirements”
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
- no effect
- 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.