Abstract
Urea is an important source of inorganic N under wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) production system in Multan, Pakistan. However, the average N loss is high, ranging from 22 to 53% of applied N, which poses adverse environmental impacts. Reduced tillage and combined application of biochar and optimal N fertilizer could improve wheat productivity and reduce N losses. We evaluated the effects of two tillage (conventional and reduced tillage), two biochar (no biochar and poultry waste biochar), and three inorganic N rate (0, 60, and 120 kg ha −1 ) treatments on productivity and economic profitability of wheat production for two continuous growing seasons (2014–2015 and 2015–2016). Generally, reduced tillage increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.2 Mg ha −1 , 3.0 kg kg −1 , and 37.0 kg ha −1 , respectively, when compared with conventional tillage. Biochar application increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.3 Mg ha −1 , 6.8 kg kg −1 , and 38.6 kg ha −1 , respectively, compared with no‐biochar plots. Reduced tillage was economically profitable within the two cropping seasons, but biochar application was not, because of the high price of biochar (US$1.00 kg −1 biochar) and application rate (10 Mg biochar ha −1 ). Overall, wheat production under reduced tillage, no biochar, and the 60‐kg N ha −1 rate resulted in the greatest economic profit in this 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage increased wheat grain yield by 0.2 Mg ha −1 against conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- reduced tillagee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 0.2 Mg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduced tillage increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.2 Mg ha −1 , 3.0 kg kg −1 , and 37.0 kg ha −1 , respectively, when compared with conventional tillage.”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage increased wheat protein content by 3.0 kg kg −1.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- reduced tillagee0
- Outcome
- protein contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3.0 kg kg −1e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduced tillage increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.2 Mg ha −1 , 3.0 kg kg −1 , and 37.0 kg ha −1 , respectively, when compared with conventional tillage.”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage increased wheat total N uptake by 37.0 kg ha −1.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- reduced tillagee0
- Outcome
- total N uptakee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 37.0 kg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduced tillage increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.2 Mg ha −1 , 3.0 kg kg −1 , and 37.0 kg ha −1 , respectively, when compared with conventional tillage.”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar increased wheat grain yield by 0.3 Mg ha −1 against no biochar.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Biochar applicatione0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 0.3 Mg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- no‐biochar plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biochar application increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.3 Mg ha −1 , 6.8 kg kg −1 , and 38.6 kg ha −1 , respectively, compared with no‐biochar plots.”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar increased wheat protein content by 6.8 kg kg −1.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Biochar applicatione0
- Outcome
- protein contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 6.8 kg kg −1e0
- Comparator
- no‐biochar plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biochar application increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.3 Mg ha −1 , 6.8 kg kg −1 , and 38.6 kg ha −1 , respectively, compared with no‐biochar plots.”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar increased wheat total N uptake by 38.6 kg ha −1.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Biochar applicatione0
- Outcome
- total N uptakee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 38.6 kg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- no‐biochar plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biochar application increased wheat grain yield, protein content, and total N uptake by 0.3 Mg ha −1 , 6.8 kg kg −1 , and 38.6 kg ha −1 , respectively, compared with no‐biochar plots.”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage was economically profitable across two seasons.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Reduced tillagee0
- Outcome
- economically profitablee0
- Qualifier
- two cropping seasonse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduced tillage was economically profitable within the two cropping seasons”
t0“Wheat Productivity”
t1“Wheat Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar application was not economically profitable across two seasons.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- biochar applicatione0
- Outcome
- biochar application was note0
- Qualifier
- US$1.00 kg −1 biochare0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“but biochar application was not, because of the high price of biochar (US$1.00 kg −1 biochar) and application rate (10 Mg biochar ha −1 ).”
t0“Wheat Productivity”
t1“Wheat Productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced tillage without biochar at 60 kg N ha −1 gave the greatest economic profit.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- reduced tillage, no biochar, and the 60‐kg N ha −1 ratee0
- Outcome
- economic profite0
- Direction
- greateste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wheat production under reduced tillage, no biochar, and the 60‐kg N ha −1 rate resulted in the greatest economic profit”
The same questions in other papers
biochar · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →biochar · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →tillage · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
54 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
68 papers more in this group
See all 72 papers →biochar · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
110 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
117 papers more in this group
See all 121 papers →tillage · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
118 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
141 papers more in this group
See all 145 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 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.