Paper · 2006 · Acta Alimentaria

Effect of reduced tillage on wheat quality traits

M. Sabo; M. Sabo; D. Jug; et al.

10
claims
22
verbatim quotes
3
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The effect of tillage systems (TS) on wheat quality traits including grain yield, thousand-kernels weight, hectoliter mass, flour extraction rate and flour rheological properties were evaluated. Five different TS were compared in winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production on one experimental field (chernosem) located in the Baranya region, north-eastern Croatia from 1998 to 2001. Tillage systems included conventional tillage (CT), disc harrowing, fine till (DHF), soil loosening (SL) + disc harrowing (DH), disc harrowing, coarse till (DHC) and no-tillage (NT). The most stable grain yield was obtained by DHF and CT in all three experimental years. There was no striking regularity with regard to applied TS and hectoliter mass and thousand-kernels weight. The biggest difference of hectoliter mass was determined between CT and NT. TS had significant influence on the flour extraction rate in all three experimental years. The influence of TS on farinographic parameters was significant for all three experimental years for the quality number. Quality number was greater under CT than under other TS. Tillage effect on extensographic and amylographic parameters in the 3-year average did not show statistically significant differences. To sum up, since disc harrowing (DHF) and (DHC) followed by soil loosening with chisel produced equal grain yield and wheat quality parameters were slightly better than conventional tillage, these systems could be presented as an even handed replacement for ploughing.

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 10

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

DHF and conventional tillage produced the most stable wheat grain yields over three years.

Treatment
DHF and CTe0
Outcome
most stable grain yielde0

Not reportedDirection

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

“The most stable grain yield was obtained by DHF and CT in all three experimental years.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 570–657 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hectoliter mass and thousand kernel weight showed no consistent pattern across tillage systems.

Treatment
applied TSe0
Outcome
hectoliter mass and thousand-kernels weighte0

Not reportedDirection

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

“There was no striking regularity with regard to applied TS and hectoliter mass and thousand-kernels weight.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 658–765 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The largest hectoliter mass difference was between conventional and no tillage.

Outcome
hectoliter masse0
Comparator
CT and NTe0

Not reportedDirection

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

“The biggest difference of hectoliter mass was determined between CT and NT.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 766–841 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage significantly influenced flour extraction rate in all three years.

Treatment
TSe0
Outcome
flour extraction ratee0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“TS had significant influence on the flour extraction rate in all three experimental years.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 842–932 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage significantly influenced farinographic quality number in all three years.

Treatment
TSe0
Outcome
quality numbere0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“The influence of TS on farinographic parameters was significant for all three experimental years for the quality number.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 933–1053 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage gave a greater quality number than other tillage systems.

Treatment
CTe0
Outcome
Quality numbere0
Direction
greatere0
Comparator
other TSe0

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

“Quality number was greater under CT than under other TS.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1054–1110 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage did not produce statistically significant differences in mean extensographic and amylographic parameters.

Treatment
Tillagee0
Outcome
extensographic and amylographic parameterse0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“Tillage effect on extensographic and amylographic parameters in the 3-year average did not show statistically significant differences.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1111–1245 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Disc harrowing followed by soil loosening gave grain yield equal to conventional tillage.

Treatment
disc harrowing (DHF) and (DHC) followed by soil loosening with chisele0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
equale0
Comparator
conventional tillagee1

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

“disc harrowing (DHF) and (DHC) followed by soil loosening with chisel produced equal grain yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1263–1359 · show in text ↑
e1

“than conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1410–1435 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Disc harrowing followed by loosening slightly improved wheat quality over conventional tillage.

Treatment
disc harrowing (DHF) and (DHC) followed by soil loosening with chisele1
Outcome
wheat quality parameterse0
Direction
slightly bettere0
Comparator
conventional tillagee0

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

“wheat quality parameters were slightly better than conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1364–1435 · show in text ↑
e1

“disc harrowing (DHF) and (DHC) followed by soil loosening with chisel”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1263–1332 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors propose disc harrowing with loosening as a replacement for ploughing.

Outcome
replacement for ploughinge0

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

“these systems could be presented as an even handed replacement for ploughing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1437–1514 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 29–34 · show in text ↑

(1S)-isoindoline-1-carboxylic acid · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

27 papers: 18 positive, 9 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

23 papers more in this group

See all 27 papers →

(1S)-isoindoline-1-carboxylic acid · quality: general · Triticum aestivum (wheat)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 →

tillage · quality: general · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 14 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

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

1,414 papers: 1,116 positive, 298 negative or no effect

297 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,116 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1,410 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 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.