Abstract
The effects of spring tillage sequence on summer annual weed populations were evaluated over two cycles of a 3-yr crop rotation of snap beans, sweet corn, and winter wheat. Continuous no-till (N) planting of vegetable crops each spring (NNNN) reduced summer annual weed density 63 to 86% compared to that of continuous conventional tillage (CCCC), depending upon site and herbicide level. Hairy nightshade populations were reduced by 88 to 96% when spring tillage was eliminated from the crop rotation. The effects of the NNNN spring tillage sequence on weed density were similar at two sites even though the crop rotations at the two sites began with different crops. The rotational tillage sequence of NCNC at the East site, in a crop rotation that began with corn, reduced summer annual weed density by 46 to 51% compared to that of continuous conventional tillage and planting (CCCC) at low and medium herbicide rates, respectively. In contrast, the tillage sequence of CNCN in the same crop rotation and at the same site increased weed density by 80% compared to that of CCCC at a low herbicide rate. The effects of the NCNC and CNCN rotational tillage sequences on weed density were reversed at the West site, and was probably caused by pairing sweet corn with conventional tillage rather than no tillage. The reduction in summer annual weed density caused by reduced spring tillage frequency did not significantly increase crop yields.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous no-till reduced summer annual weed density by 63 to 86% versus continuous conventional tillage.
Verbatim
e0“Continuous no-till (N) planting of vegetable crops each spring (NNNN) reduced summer annual weed density 63 to 86% compared to that of continuous conventional tillage (CCCC), depending upon site and herbicide level.”
Claim · model-written summary
Eliminating spring tillage reduced hairy nightshade populations by 88 to 96%.
- Taxon
- snap beanst0
- Treatment
- spring tillage was eliminatede0
- Interactor
- Hairy nightshadee0weed
- Outcome
- Hairy nightshade populationse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 88 to 96%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Hairy nightshade populations were reduced by 88 to 96% when spring tillage was eliminated from the crop rotation.”
t0“snap beans”
Claim · model-written summary
NNNN had similar weed-density effects at two sites with differing initial crops.
Verbatim
e0“The effects of the NNNN spring tillage sequence on weed density were similar at two sites even though the crop rotations at the two sites began with different crops.”
t0“Vegetable Row Crop”
Claim · model-written summary
NCNC reduced weed density by 46 to 51% versus CCCC at the East site.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse0 - Treatment
- NCNCe0
- Interactor
- summer annual weede0weed
- Outcome
- summer annual weed densitye0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 46 to 51%e0
- Comparator
- continuous conventional tillage and planting (CCCC)e0
- Setting
- East sitee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The rotational tillage sequence of NCNC at the East site, in a crop rotation that began with corn, reduced summer annual weed density by 46 to 51% compared to that of continuous conventional tillage and planting (CCCC) at low and medium herbicide rates, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage frequency did not significantly increase crop yields.
- Taxon
- Vegetable Row Cropt0
- Treatment
- reduced spring tillage frequencye0
- Outcome
- crop yieldse0
- Direction
- did not significantly increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The reduction in summer annual weed density caused by reduced spring tillage frequency did not significantly increase crop yields.”
t0“Vegetable Row Crop”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · pest · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.