Abstract
Compared with ploughing tillage, no-tillage systems through their diversified effect on soil, modify its properties, and consequently conditions of plants' growth and development. The aim of the study was evaluation of the long-term effect of various tillage systems on the pea yield and some soil properties. The experimental design included 5 tillage variants: 1 - conventional tillage applied annually: skimming + harrowing, sow ploughing to a depth of 25 cm, cultivator unit (cultivator with a string roller), 2 - reduced tillage applied annually (stubble cultivator), 3 - direct sowing into stubble applied annually, 4 - direct sowing applied alternately with reduced tillage, 5 - direct sowing interrupted after 2 years with an annual reduced tillage. The highest pea yields were obtained after reduced tillage, while application of conventional tillage and direct sowing under this plant resulted in a decrease in the grain yield by 7.5 and 11.0%, respectively. Differences in the grain yields in pea between tillage systems resulted mainly from a different plant density per 1 m 2 before harvest. No-tillage systems did not decrease protein content in pea grains compared with pea cultivation in a ploughing system. No beneficial effect was observed of the applied direct sowing interrupted with reduced tillage on the yield of pea. Long-term application of reduced tillage and direct sowing was favorable for increasing moisture and bulk density of the soil as well as for decreasing capillary water capacity. Moreover, it stimulated activity of soil enzymes to a depth of 10 cm.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Pea yield was highest after reduced tillage.
- Taxon
- pea
Lathyrus oleraceust0 - Treatment
- reduced tillagee1
- Outcome
- pea yieldse1
- Direction
- higheste1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e1“The highest pea yields were obtained after reduced tillage, while application of conventional tillage and direct sowing under this plant resulted in a decrease in the grain yield by 7.5 and 11.0%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage decreased pea grain yield by 7.5% relative to reduced tillage.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- conventional tillagee1
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- decreasee1
- Value
- 7.5e1
- Comparator
- reduced tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e1“The highest pea yields were obtained after reduced tillage, while application of conventional tillage and direct sowing under this plant resulted in a decrease in the grain yield by 7.5 and 11.0%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct sowing decreased pea grain yield by 11.0% relative to reduced tillage.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- direct sowinge1
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- decreasee1
- Value
- 11.0%e1
- Comparator
- reduced tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e1“The highest pea yields were obtained after reduced tillage, while application of conventional tillage and direct sowing under this plant resulted in a decrease in the grain yield by 7.5 and 11.0%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Differences in pea grain yield between tillage systems mainly resulted from different plant density before harvest.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Outcome
- grain yieldse2
- Qualifier
- a different plant density per 1 m 2 before harveste2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e2“Differences in the grain yields in pea between tillage systems resulted mainly from a different plant density per 1 m 2 before harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage systems did not decrease protein content in pea grains compared with ploughing.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- No-tillage systemse3
- Outcome
- protein content in pea grainse3
- Direction
- did not decreasee3
- Comparator
- pea cultivation in a ploughing systeme3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e3“No-tillage systems did not decrease protein content in pea grains compared with pea cultivation in a ploughing system”
Claim · model-written summary
Direct sowing interrupted with reduced tillage had no beneficial effect on pea yield.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- direct sowing interrupted with reduced tillagee4
- Outcome
- the yield of peae4
- Direction
- No beneficial effecte4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e4“No beneficial effect was observed of the applied direct sowing interrupted with reduced tillage on the yield of pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-term reduced tillage and direct sowing increased soil moisture.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- reduced tillage and direct sowinge5
- Outcome
- moisturee5
- Direction
- increasinge5
- Qualifier
- of the soile5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e5“Long-term application of reduced tillage and direct sowing was favorable for increasing moisture and bulk density of the soil as well as for decreasing capillary water capacity”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-term reduced tillage and direct sowing increased soil bulk density.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- reduced tillage and direct sowinge5
- Outcome
- bulk densitye5
- Direction
- increasinge5
- Qualifier
- of the soile5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e5“Long-term application of reduced tillage and direct sowing was favorable for increasing moisture and bulk density of the soil as well as for decreasing capillary water capacity”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-term reduced tillage and direct sowing decreased soil capillary water capacity.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- reduced tillage and direct sowinge5
- Outcome
- capillary water capacitye5
- Direction
- decreasinge5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e5“Long-term application of reduced tillage and direct sowing was favorable for increasing moisture and bulk density of the soil as well as for decreasing capillary water capacity”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-term reduced tillage and direct sowing stimulated soil enzyme activity to 10 cm depth.
- Taxon
- peaLathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- reduced tillage and direct sowinge5
- Outcome
- activity of soil enzymese6
- Direction
- stimulatede6
- Qualifier
- to a depth of 10 cme6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEA (Pisum sativum L.)”
e5“Long-term application of reduced tillage and direct sowing was favorable for increasing moisture and bulk density of the soil as well as for decreasing capillary water capacity”
e6“Moreover, it stimulated activity of soil enzymes to a depth of 10 cm”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · quality: protein · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
transplanting · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →tillage · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- positive
65 papers more in this group
See all 69 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.