Abstract
Abstract Low soil temperatures that are induced by crop residue have been shown to delay corn ( Zea mays L.) development. The exact conditions under which retardation takes place and whether the delay is only due to thermal effects still need to be elucidated. This study was conducted to characterize corn vegetative development, with and without residue cover, and to determine if differences in seed‐zone temperature account for the differences in development. The effects of an oat ( Avena sativa L.) straw mulch and an inert poplar excelsior ( Populus ) mulch, applied at second leaf tip emergence and at the time of full extension of the fourth leaf, on seed‐zone temperature, time, and thermal time (daily temperature accumulation) between specific vegetative stages, were investigated on a Conover loam (mixed, mesic, Udollic Ochraqualf) under irrigated conditions. Developmental delays occurred as average soil maxima temperatures, under the mulches, were 2.2 °C lower than the bare soil control. When mulches were applied at second leaf tip emergence, soil temperature‐based thermal time was significantly higher for the oat mulch than for the popular mulch or the bare soil, until the full extension of the fourth leaf in 1988 and the third leaf in 1989. Modeling equations derived from CERES‐MAIZE accurately predicted thermal times to the full extension of the third leaf and sixth leaf for most treatments, but underestimated thermal time for the 1988 oat mulch. When applied at full extension of the fourth leaf, oat straw had minimal effects on development. The differences in thermal time due to the two mulches during the early vegetative stages of corn, suggest that in addition to soil temperature, allelopathy from oat straw may be a source of developmental delay and that its occurrence is weather‐dependent.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Mulches delayed corn development as maximum soil temperatures fell 2.2 °C below bare soil.
- Taxon
- Corn
Zea mays subsp. mayst0 - Treatment
- mulchese0
- Outcome
- Developmental delayse0
- Direction
- delayse0
- Qualifier
- 2.2 °C lowere0
- Comparator
- bare soil controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Developmental delays occurred as average soil maxima temperatures, under the mulches, were 2.2 °C lower than the bare soil control.”
t0“Corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Early oat mulch significantly raised thermal time relative to poplar mulch or bare soil.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Treatment
- oat mulche0
- Outcome
- soil temperature‐based thermal timee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- until the full extension of the fourth leaf in 1988 and the third leaf in 1989e0
- Comparator
- popular mulch or the bare soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When mulches were applied at second leaf tip emergence, soil temperature‐based thermal time was significantly higher for the oat mulch than for the popular mulch or the bare soil, until the full extension of the fourth leaf in 1988 and the third leaf in 1989.”
t0“Corn”
Claim · model-written summary
CERES MAIZE equations accurately predicted thermal time to third and sixth leaf extension for most treatments.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Outcome
- thermal times to the full extension of the third leaf and sixth leafe0
- Direction
- accurately predictede0
- Comparator
- most treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modeling equations derived from CERES‐MAIZE accurately predicted thermal times to the full extension of the third leaf and sixth leaf for most treatments, but underestimated thermal time for the 1988 oat mulch.”
t0“Corn”
Claim · model-written summary
The equations underestimated thermal time for 1988 oat mulch.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Outcome
- thermal timee0
- Direction
- underestimatede0
- Comparator
- 1988 oat mulche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modeling equations derived from CERES‐MAIZE accurately predicted thermal times to the full extension of the third leaf and sixth leaf for most treatments, but underestimated thermal time for the 1988 oat mulch.”
t0“Corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Oat straw applied at fourth leaf extension minimally affected development.
- Taxon
- CornZea mays subsp. mayst0
- Organ / stage
- full extension of the fourth leafe0
- Treatment
- oat strawe0
- Outcome
- developmente0
- Direction
- minimal effectse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When applied at full extension of the fourth leaf, oat straw had minimal effects on development.”
t0“Corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors suggest oat straw allelopathy may contribute to weather dependent developmental delay.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse0
- Treatment
- oat strawe0
- Outcome
- developmental delaye0
- Qualifier
- weather‐dependente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The differences in thermal time due to the two mulches during the early vegetative stages of corn, suggest that in addition to soil temperature, allelopathy from oat straw may be a source of developmental delay and that its occurrence is weather‐dependent.”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 97 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
108 papers more in this group
See all 112 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.