Paper · 2019 · Precision agriculture '19

Comparison of precision and conventional irrigation management of cotton

E. Vories; S. O’Shaughnessy; M. Andrade

2
claims
4
verbatim quotes
12
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Soil textural variability diminishes the effectiveness of conventional irrigation management. Variable rate irrigation (VRI) can address soil variability; however, users need guidance to prepare prescriptions for optimal water application. A study was conducted at Portageville, MO, USA, in 2016 and 2017 with the objective to compare rainfed cotton and cotton irrigated based on the USDA-ARS Irrigation Scheduling Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (ISSCADA) system and a water balance method. Although the trend was for the rainfed treatment to have the lowest yield in both years, the yield differences among all treatments in 2017 were not significant. The study is continuing at Portageville and other locations and the ISSCADA system is constantly being improved to better meet the needs of agricultural producers.

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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rainfed cotton tended to have the lowest yield in both years.

Treatment
rainfed treatmente0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
loweste0
Qualifier
in both yearse0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Although the trend was for the rainfed treatment to have the lowest yield in both years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 501–588 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton yield differences among all treatments in 2017 were not significant.

Treatment
all treatmentse0
Outcome
yield differencese0
Qualifier
in 2017e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the yield differences among all treatments in 2017 were not significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 590–661 · show in text ↑
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 66–72 · show in text ↑

rainfall · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 7 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.