Abstract
Conservation tillage practices have gained interests. A 2-year field study (2014–2015) was conducted to evaluate four N rates (0, 69, 138, and 207 kg N ha−1) effects on irrigated sweet corn (Zea mays L.) grown with or without wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) residue removal and conventional (CT), reduced (RT), or no-tillage (NT) practices near Shiraz, Iran. After 2 years, maximum marketable yield occurred at 156 and 159 kg N ha−1 under CT and NT, respectively, while yield was tended to be increased with increasing N rates under RT. Increasing N rate increased total plant N uptake, shoot, and grain N accumulation. The lowest nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) was obtained under NT, while RT and CT either showed similar effects or RT was superior over CT. Soil total N was greater under CT and residue retention showed 18% and 14% higher N concentration than residue removal in 2014 and 2015, respectively. Soil organic matter was the highest (2.59%) under RT with residue retention and 138 kg N ha−1. Conservation tillage needs more N rather than CT during transition from conventional to conservation agriculture practices, but it is based on the short-term results and evaluation of long-term experiment is highly recommended.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum sweet corn marketable yield occurred at 156 under CT.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“After 2 years, maximum marketable yield occurred at 156 and 159 kg N ha−1 under CT and NT, respectively, while yield was tended to be increased with increasing N rates under RT”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum sweet corn marketable yield occurred at 159 kg N ha−1 under NT.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“After 2 years, maximum marketable yield occurred at 156 and 159 kg N ha−1 under CT and NT, respectively, while yield was tended to be increased with increasing N rates under RT”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Under RT, sweet corn marketable yield tended to increase with N rate.
Verbatim
e0“After 2 years, maximum marketable yield occurred at 156 and 159 kg N ha−1 under CT and NT, respectively, while yield was tended to be increased with increasing N rates under RT”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing N rate increased sweet corn total plant N uptake.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increasing N rate increased total plant N uptake, shoot, and grain N accumulation”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing N rate increased sweet corn shoot.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increasing N rate increased total plant N uptake, shoot, and grain N accumulation”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing N rate increased sweet corn grain N accumulation.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increasing N rate increased total plant N uptake, shoot, and grain N accumulation”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Sweet corn nitrogen use efficiency was lowest under no tillage.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) was obtained under NT, while RT and CT either showed similar effects or RT was superior over CT”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced and conventional tillage had similar or superior nitrogen use efficiency under reduced tillage.
Verbatim
e0“RT and CT either showed similar effects or RT was superior over CT”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil total N was greater under conventional tillage.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Soil total N was greater under CT”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Residue retention raised soil N concentration by 18% in 2014.
Verbatim
e0“residue retention showed 18% and 14% higher N concentration than residue removal in 2014 and 2015, respectively”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Residue retention raised soil N concentration by 14% in 2015.
Verbatim
e0“residue retention showed 18% and 14% higher N concentration than residue removal in 2014 and 2015, respectively”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil organic matter peaked at 2.59% under reduced tillage, residue retention and 138 kg N ha−1.
- Taxon
- sweet cornt0
- Treatment
- RT with residue retention and 138 kg N ha−1e0
- Outcome
- Soil organic mattere0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.59%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Soil organic matter was the highest (2.59%) under RT with residue retention and 138 kg N ha−1”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation tillage needs more N than conventional tillage during transition.
Verbatim
e0“Conservation tillage needs more N rather than CT during transition from conventional to conservation agriculture practices”
t0“sweet corn”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend long-term evaluation of conservation tillage N needs.
Verbatim
e0“evaluation of long-term experiment is highly recommended”
t0“sweet corn”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →tillage · nutrient: efficiency · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →nitrogen · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
39 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →organic · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →organic · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
97 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
116 papers more in this group
See all 120 papers →tillage · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
92 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →nitrogen · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
402 papers in the same direction as this paper · 83 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
485 papers more in this group
See all 489 papers →nitrogen · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
618 papers in the same direction as this paper · 115 in the opposite direction · 14 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
744 papers more in this group
See all 748 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.