Abstract
An experiment was conducted on a red earth at Harden, N.S.W., to investigate the effects of tillage and stubble management on the growth and yield of wheat in the first year of conservation cropping. Treatments involved stubble-management systems of incorporation, burning or retention combined with tillage systems of either direct drilling or minimum tillage. The experiment was conducted on an oat stubble of 3.9 t ha-1. Direct drilling and stubble retention both reduced seedling growth by 15%, compared to cultivated and stubble burnt treatments, but had no effect on plant density or tillering. The effects on shoot growth were additive and persisted until maturity, leading to grain yields which varied from 2.16 t ha-1 for the stubble-mulched, direct-drilled treatment to 3.20 t ha-1 for the burned-stubble, minimum-till treatment. Direct drilling reduced the total root length in the profile (0-160 cm) at anthesis by 40%, but there was no effect of stubble retention. Reduced shoot growth and rooting depth on direct-drilled and stubble-retained treatments reduced the recovery of water and mineral N by the crop and increased the leaching of mineral N below the root zone. Early shoot growth reductions on direct-drilled plots were not related to levels of soil water, mineral nitrogen (N) or soil temperature. Reduced shoot growth was associated with increased severity of Rhizoctonia in some direct drilled plots, but growth reductions often occurred in the absence of obvious symptoms. High soil strength (>2 MPa) in the top 10 cm of soil may have contributed to reduced growth, although the exact mechanism remains unclear. Reduced growth associated with the presence of stubble was not caused by immobilization of N or increased leaf disease, although reduced soil temperatures may have been partly responsible.
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Direct drilling reduced wheat seedling growth by 15% relative to cultivated treatment.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- Direct drillinge0
- Outcome
- seedling growthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Comparator
- cultivatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Direct drilling and stubble retention both reduced seedling growth by 15%, compared to cultivated and stubble burnt treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Stubble retention reduced wheat seedling growth by 15% relative to burnt stubble.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- stubble retentione0
- Outcome
- seedling growthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Comparator
- stubble burnt treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Direct drilling and stubble retention both reduced seedling growth by 15%, compared to cultivated and stubble burnt treatments”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct drilling did not affect wheat plant density or tillering.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Direct drillinge0
- Outcome
- plant density or tilleringe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Direct drilling and stubble retention both reduced seedling growth by 15%, compared to cultivated and stubble burnt treatments, but had no effect on plant density or tillering”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Stubble retention did not affect wheat plant density or tillering.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- stubble retentione0
- Outcome
- plant density or tilleringe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Direct drilling and stubble retention both reduced seedling growth by 15%, compared to cultivated and stubble burnt treatments, but had no effect on plant density or tillering”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The effects on shoot growth were additive and persisted until maturity.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- shoot growthe0
- Qualifier
- additive and persisted until maturitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The effects on shoot growth were additive and persisted until maturity”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Stubble-mulched direct-drilled wheat yielded 2.16 t ha-1, versus 3.20 t ha-1 with burned-stubble minimum tillage.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- stubble-mulched, direct-drilled treatmente0
- Outcome
- grain yieldse0
- Direction
- lowerinferrede0
- Value
- 2.16 t ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 3.20 t ha-1e0
- Comparator
- burned-stubble, minimum-till treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain yields which varied from 2.16 t ha-1 for the stubble-mulched, direct-drilled treatment to 3.20 t ha-1 for the burned-stubble, minimum-till treatment”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct drilling reduced total wheat root length at anthesis by 40%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Organ / stage
- anthesise0
- Treatment
- Direct drillinge0
- Outcome
- total root lengthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 40%e0
- Qualifier
- 0-160 cme0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Direct drilling reduced the total root length in the profile (0-160 cm) at anthesis by 40%”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Stubble retention did not affect wheat root length.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- stubble retentione0
- Outcome
- total root lengthe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Direct drilling reduced the total root length in the profile (0-160 cm) at anthesis by 40%, but there was no effect of stubble retention”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced shoot growth and rooting depth under direct drilling reduced crop recovery of water and mineral N.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- direct-drillede0
- Outcome
- recovery of water and mineral N by the crope0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduced shoot growth and rooting depth on direct-drilled and stubble-retained treatments reduced the recovery of water and mineral N by the crop”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced shoot growth and rooting depth under stubble retention reduced crop recovery of water and mineral N.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- stubble-retained treatmentse0
- Outcome
- recovery of water and mineral N by the crope0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduced shoot growth and rooting depth on direct-drilled and stubble-retained treatments reduced the recovery of water and mineral N by the crop”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct drilling increased mineral N leaching below the wheat root zone.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- direct-drillede0
- Outcome
- leaching of mineral N below the root zonee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“direct-drilled and stubble-retained treatments reduced the recovery of water and mineral N by the crop and increased the leaching of mineral N below the root zone”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Stubble retention increased mineral N leaching below the wheat root zone.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- stubble-retained treatmentse0
- Outcome
- leaching of mineral N below the root zonee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“stubble-retained treatments reduced the recovery of water and mineral N by the crop and increased the leaching of mineral N below the root zone”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Early shoot growth reduction under direct drilling was unrelated to soil water, mineral N, or soil temperature.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- direct-drilled plotse0
- Outcome
- Early shoot growth reductionse0
- Qualifier
- not related to levels of soil water, mineral nitrogen (N) or soil temperaturee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Early shoot growth reductions on direct-drilled plots were not related to levels of soil water, mineral nitrogen (N) or soil temperature”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced wheat shoot growth was associated with more severe Rhizoctonia in some direct-drilled plots.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- direct drilled plotse0
- Interactor
- Rhizoctonia
.jpg?width=60)
Rhizoctoniae0pathogen - Outcome
- Reduced shoot growthe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Reduced shoot growth was associated with increased severity of Rhizoctonia in some direct drilled plots”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Growth reductions often occurred without obvious Rhizoctonia symptoms.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- growth reductionse0
- Qualifier
- in the absence of obvious symptomse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“growth reductions often occurred in the absence of obvious symptoms”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
High topsoil strength may have contributed to reduced wheat growth.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- reduced growthe0
- Qualifier
- High soil strength (>2 MPa) in the top 10 cm of soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“High soil strength (>2 MPa) in the top 10 cm of soil may have contributed to reduced growth, although the exact mechanism remains unclear”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Stubble-associated reduced growth was not caused by N immobilization or increased leaf disease.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- presence of stubblee0
- Outcome
- Reduced growthe0
- Qualifier
- not caused by immobilization of N or increased leaf diseasee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduced growth associated with the presence of stubble was not caused by immobilization of N or increased leaf disease”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower soil temperature may partly explain stubble-associated growth reduction.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- growthe0
- Qualifier
- reduced soil temperatures may have been partly responsiblee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduced growth associated with the presence of stubble was not caused by immobilization of N or increased leaf disease, although reduced soil temperatures may have been partly responsible”
t0“wheat”
The same questions in other papers
transplanting · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 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.