Abstract
Increasing yield per unit area with maintaining soil properties and preserving the ecosystem at the same time is the chief concern for agronomists all over the world. Field burning along with the history was considered a cheaper tool which is still use by most farmers for weed control in open fields. A study was therefore applied to investigate the effect of mulcher (subsurface tillage) and field burning on soil seedbank, soil properties, and performance of subsequent wheat crop under rainfed conditions of Duhok region. This study was conducted at the faculty of Agriculture and Forestry/University of Duhok during 2011-2012 growing season. The results indicated that both soil seedbank and field weed population were significantly increased by mulcher and decreased when the field was burnt in the summer; meanwhile, some soil properties such as balk density and porosity were improved by mulcher and were not or slightly affected by field burning. As for wheat growth and yield, excluding the number of tillers per plant (2.34) in field burning treatment, all other traits were not affected significantly by the factors under the study.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching significantly increased the soil seedbank.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- mulchere0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- soil seedbanke0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both soil seedbank and field weed population were significantly increased by mulcher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching significantly increased field weed populations.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- mulchere0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- field weed populatione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both soil seedbank and field weed population were significantly increased by mulcher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Field burning decreased soil seedbank.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- field was burnt in the summere0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- soil seedbanke0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both soil seedbank and field weed population were significantly increased by mulcher and decreased when the field was burnt in the summer”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Field burning decreased field weed population.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- field was burnt in the summere0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- field weed populatione0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both soil seedbank and field weed population were significantly increased by mulcher and decreased when the field was burnt in the summer”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching improved soil bulk density and porosity.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- mulchere0
- Outcome
- balk density and porositye0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“some soil properties such as balk density and porosity were improved by mulcher”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Burning had no or slight effects on soil bulk density and porosity.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- field burninge0
- Outcome
- balk density and porositye0
- Direction
- not or slightly affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“balk density and porosity were improved by mulcher and were not or slightly affected by field burning”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat tiller number under burning was 2.34 per plant.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- field burning treatmente0
- Outcome
- number of tillers per plante0
- Value
- 2.34e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“number of tillers per plant (2.34) in field burning treatment”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Other wheat growth and yield traits were not significantly affected by the studied factors.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- factors under the studye0
- Outcome
- all other traitse0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“As for wheat growth and yield, excluding the number of tillers per plant (2.34) in field burning treatment, all other traits were not affected significantly by the factors under the study.”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →mulching · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →fire · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
fire · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.