Abstract
Water availability is a major constraint for crop production in semiarid environments. The impact of tillage practices on water potential gradient, water transfer resistance, yield, and water use efficiency (WUEg) of spring wheat was determined on the western Loess Plateau. Six tillage practices implemented in 2001 and their effects were determined in 2016 and 2017 including conventional tillage with no straw (T), no-till with straw cover (NTS), no-till with no straw (NT), conventional tillage with straw incorporated (TS), conventional tillage with plastic mulch (TP), and no-till with plastic mulch (NTP). No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T. These treatments also significantly reduced the soil–leaf water potential gradient at the 0–10 cm soil depth at the seedling stage by 35, 48, and 35%, respectively, and at the 30–50 cm soil depth at flowering by 62, 46, and 65%, respectively, compared to T. Thus, NTS, TP, and NTP reduced soil–leaf water transfer resistance and enhanced transpiration. Compared to T, the NTS, TP, and NTP practices increased biomass yield by 18, 36, and 40%; grain yield by 28, 22, and 24%; and WUEg by 24, 26, and 24%, respectively. These results demonstrate that no-till with straw mulch and plastic mulching with either no-till or conventional tillage decrease the soil–leaf water potential gradient and soil–leaf water transfer resistance and enhance sustainable intensification of wheat production in semi-arid areas.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 18
Claim · model-written summary
No-till with straw cover improved wheat soil water potential by 42 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- No-till with straw covere0
- Outcome
- soil water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 42e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
TP improved wheat soil water potential by 47 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- TPe0
- Outcome
- soil water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 47e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
NTP improved wheat soil water potential by 57% relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NTPe0
- Outcome
- soil water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 57%e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till with straw cover improved wheat root water potential by 34 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- No-till with straw covere0
- Outcome
- root water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 34e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
TP improved wheat root water potential by 35 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- TPe0
- Outcome
- root water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 35e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
NTP improved wheat root water potential by 51% relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NTPe0
- Outcome
- root water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 51%e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till with straw cover improved wheat leaf water potential by 37 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- No-till with straw covere0
- Outcome
- leaf water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 37e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
TP improved wheat leaf water potential by 48 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- TPe0
- Outcome
- leaf water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 48e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
NTP improved wheat leaf water potential by 42% relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NTPe0
- Outcome
- leaf water potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 42%e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till with straw cover improved wheat tillering stage by 21 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- No-till with straw covere0
- Outcome
- tillering stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 21e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
TP improved wheat tillering stage by 24 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- TPe0
- Outcome
- tillering stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 24e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
NTP improved wheat tillering stage by 30% relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NTPe0
- Outcome
- tillering stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 30%e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till with straw cover improved wheat jointing stage by 28 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- No-till with straw covere0
- Outcome
- jointing stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 28e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
TP improved wheat jointing stage by 32 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- TPe0
- Outcome
- jointing stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 32e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
NTP improved wheat jointing stage by 36% relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NTPe0
- Outcome
- jointing stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 36%e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till with straw cover improved wheat flowering stage by 10 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- No-till with straw covere0
- Outcome
- flowering stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 10e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
TP improved wheat flowering stage by 26 relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- TPe0
- Outcome
- flowering stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 26e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
Claim · model-written summary
NTP improved wheat flowering stage by 16% relative to T.
- Taxon
- Spring WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- NTPe0
- Outcome
- flowering stagee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 16%e0
- Comparator
- Te0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till with straw cover, TP, and NTP significantly improved soil water potential at the seedling stage by 42, 47, and 57%, respectively; root water potential at the seedling stage by 34, 35, and 51%, respectively; leaf water potential at the seedling stage by 37, 48, and 42%, respectively; tillering stage by 21, 24, and 30%, respectively; jointing stage by 28, 32, and 36%, respectively; and flowering stage by 10, 26, and 16%, respectively, compared to T.”
t0“Conservation Tillage Increases Water Use Efficiency of Spring Wheat by Optimizing Water Transfer in a Semi-Arid Environment”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →tillage · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
113 papers more in this group
See all 117 papers →tillage · phenology · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →mulching · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
57 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
60 papers more in this group
See all 64 papers →tillage · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
207 papers in the same direction as this paper · 54 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
263 papers more in this group
See all 267 papers →mulching · phenology · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.