Abstract
Cotton (G ossypium hirsutum L.) growers have adopted no-tillage systems with a cover crop in the Tennessee Valley under non-irrigated conditions, but a comparison of plant and soil parameters across irrigated tillage systems has not been inves tigated in this region of Alabama. This study was conducted to compare seed cotton yields, whole plant biomass, leaf nitrogen (N) concentrations at mid-bloom, soil moisture contents at two depths, and leaf stomatal conductance on a Decatur silt loam across different tillage systems and irriga tion regimes during the 2001 to 2003 growing seasons. Treatments were arranged as a split-plot in a randomized complete block design with three replications. Tillage systems (conventional tillage; no cover crop and no surface tillage with a cover crop both with and without fall paratillage) were the main plots, and irrigation regimes (0, 2.7, 5.4, 8.1 mm day -1 ) were the subplots. Tillage system and irrigation regime increased seed cotton yields two out of three years, and leaf stomatal conductance during a drought year. No surface tillage, regardless of fall paratillage, produced 15% more whole plant biomass than conventional tillage treatments one of three years, while an irrigation rate of 5.4 mm day -1 maximized plant biomass two of three years. Leaf N concentrations at mid-bloom were approximately 7% lower in the no surface tillage systems compared with the conventional tillage systems when averaged across all three years. Differences in soil water contents were only observed in 2001 with soil water con tents 15% lower in the 0 to 20-cm depth following fall paratillage compared with no fall paratillage. Higher soil moisture contents were observed in the conventional tillage system following paratill age, while soil moisture contents following no fall paratillage were higher in the no surface tillage system in the 20- to 40-cm depth. Results of these plant and soil measurements suggest that cotton growers in the Tennessee Valley using irrigation should not change from the recommended con servation tillage system with a cover crop.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage system and irrigation regime increased seed cotton yields in two of three years.
- Taxon
- Cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- Tillage system and irrigation regimee1
- Outcome
- seed cotton yieldse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Qualifier
- two out of three yearse1
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e1“Tillage system and irrigation regime increased seed cotton yields two out of three years”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage system and irrigation regime increased leaf stomatal conductance during a drought year.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Tillage system and irrigation regimee2
- Outcome
- leaf stomatal conductancee2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Qualifier
- during a drought yeare2
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e2“Tillage system and irrigation regime increased seed cotton yields two out of three years, and leaf stomatal conductance during a drought year”
Claim · model-written summary
No surface tillage produced 15% more whole plant biomass than conventional tillage in one of three years.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- No surface tillagee3
- Outcome
- whole plant biomasse3
- Direction
- moree3
- Value
- 15%e3
- Qualifier
- one of three yearse3
- Comparator
- conventional tillage treatmentse3
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e3“No surface tillage, regardless of fall paratillage, produced 15% more whole plant biomass than conventional tillage treatments one of three years”
Claim · model-written summary
An irrigation rate of 5.4 mm day -1 maximized plant biomass in two of three years.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation rate of 5.4 mm day -1e4
- Outcome
- plant biomasse4
- Direction
- maximizede4
- Qualifier
- two of three yearse4
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e4“an irrigation rate of 5.4 mm day -1 maximized plant biomass two of three years”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf N concentrations at mid-bloom were about 7% lower in no surface tillage than in conventional tillage, averaged over three years.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Organ / stage
- mid-bloome5
- Treatment
- no surface tillage systemse5
- Outcome
- Leaf N concentrations at mid-bloome5
- Direction
- lowere5
- Value
- 7%e5
- Qualifier
- averaged across all three yearse5
- Comparator
- conventional tillage systemse5
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e5“Leaf N concentrations at mid-bloom were approximately 7% lower in the no surface tillage systems compared with the conventional tillage systems when averaged across all three years”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil water contents were 15% lower in the 0 to 20 cm layer after fall paratillage than without it, observed only in 2001.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- fall paratillagee7
- Outcome
- soil water contentse6
- Direction
- lowere7
- Value
- 15%e7
- Qualifier
- only observed in 2001e6
- Comparator
- no fall paratillagee7
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e6“Differences in soil water contents were only observed in 2001”
e7“15% lower in the 0 to 20-cm depth following fall paratillage compared with no fall paratillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher soil moisture contents were observed in the conventional tillage system.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- conventional tillage systeme6
- Outcome
- soil moisture contentse6
- Direction
- Highere6
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e6“Higher soil moisture contents were observed in the conventional tillage system”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil moisture contents were higher in the no surface tillage system in the 20- to 40-cm depth when there was no fall paratillage.
- Taxon
- CottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- no surface tillage systeme0
- Outcome
- soil moisture contentse6
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- 20- to 40-cm depthe0
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleyt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Irrigated Cotton Response to Tillage Systems in the Tennessee Valley”
e6“Higher soil moisture contents were observed in the conventional tillage system”
e0“were higher in the no surface tillage system in the 20- to 40-cm depth”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton growers in the Tennessee Valley using irrigation should not change from the recommended conservation tillage system with a cover crop.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Outcome
- should not change from the recommendede0
- Qualifier
- using irrigatione0
- Setting
- Tennessee Valleye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cotton growers in the Tennessee Valley using irrigation should not change from the recommended”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · physiology: gas exchange · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →irrigation · physiology: gas exchange · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →tillage · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →irrigation · growth · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
100 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
140 papers more in this group
See all 144 papers →tillage · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
112 papers in the same direction as this paper · 38 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
155 papers more in this group
See all 159 papers →irrigation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
303 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction · 9 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
395 papers more in this group
See all 399 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.