Abstract
In the southern Huang-Huai-Hai (HHH) region, China, maize production is frequently threatened by waterlogging at the seedling stage and by drought at the big flare stage. A two-year field experiment was performed to explore whether subsoiling (SS) in the winter wheat season could improve the photosynthetic capacity and increase the water use efficiency (WUE) of summer maize using the variety, Luyu9105. A split design was adopted in the experiment. The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT). The subplots consisted of two irrigation methods, i.e., applied supplemental irrigation at the big flare stage (I) and no irrigation at the big flare stage (NI). The results showed that the SS treatment significantly increased soil water content (SWC) in the 40–60 cm soil layer. The SS treatment improved green leaf area index (gLAI) by 15.1%–30.2%, and enhanced the ear-leaf net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (ci) and transpiration rate (Tr), and was accompanied by an increase in the grain-filling duration (T) by 5 days and the mean grain-filling rate (Va). The SS treatment decreased the stomatal limitation (Ls), indicating that RT treatment, which was under lower SWC, led to a decrease in Pn. Applied supplemental irrigation under RT treatment was able to compensate for the growth of leaves, but could not reverse the decreasing trend in the gLAI. Ultimately, the SS treatment improved WUE by 9.1%–9.9%, and increased grain yields by 10.0%–29.3%. Therefore, this study showed that in the southern Huang-Huai-Hai Plain, which has a yellow cinnamon soil type, the practice of SS can improve the photosynthetic characteristics of leaves and WUE of rainfed summer maize.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling significantly increased soil water content in the 40–60 cm soil layer compared with rotary tillage.
- Treatment
- SS treatmente1
- Outcome
- soil water content (SWC)e1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Qualifier
- 40–60 cm soil layere1
- Comparator
- rotary tillage (RT)e2
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The SS treatment significantly increased soil water content (SWC) in the 40–60 cm soil layer”
e2“The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling improved green leaf area index by 15.1%–30.2% compared with rotary tillage.
- Treatment
- SS treatmente4
- Outcome
- green leaf area index (gLAI)e4
- Direction
- improvede4
- Value
- 15.1%–30.2%e4
- Comparator
- rotary tillage (RT)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The SS treatment improved green leaf area index (gLAI) by 15.1%–30.2%, and enhanced the ear-leaf net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (ci) and transpiration rate (Tr)”
e2“The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling enhanced ear-leaf net photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance and intercellular CO2 concentration compared with rotary tillage.
- Treatment
- SS treatmente4
- Outcome
- net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (ci)e4
- Direction
- enhancede4
- Comparator
- rotary tillage (RT)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The SS treatment improved green leaf area index (gLAI) by 15.1%–30.2%, and enhanced the ear-leaf net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (ci) and transpiration rate (Tr)”
e2“The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling enhanced transpiration rate compared with rotary tillage.
- Treatment
- SS treatmente4
- Outcome
- transpiration rate (Tr)e4
- Direction
- enhancede4
- Comparator
- rotary tillage (RT)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The SS treatment improved green leaf area index (gLAI) by 15.1%–30.2%, and enhanced the ear-leaf net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (ci) and transpiration rate (Tr)”
e2“The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling increased grain-filling duration by 5 days.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The SS treatment improved green leaf area index (gLAI) by 15.1%–30.2%, and enhanced the ear-leaf net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (ci) and transpiration rate (Tr)”
e5“and was accompanied by an increase in the grain-filling duration (T) by 5 days and the mean grain-filling rate (Va)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling increased the mean grain-filling rate.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The SS treatment improved green leaf area index (gLAI) by 15.1%–30.2%, and enhanced the ear-leaf net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (gs), intercellular CO2 concentration (ci) and transpiration rate (Tr)”
e5“and was accompanied by an increase in the grain-filling duration (T) by 5 days and the mean grain-filling rate (Va)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling decreased stomatal limitation compared with rotary tillage.
- Treatment
- SS treatmente6
- Outcome
- stomatal limitation (Ls)e6
- Direction
- decreasede6
- Comparator
- rotary tillage (RT)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“The SS treatment decreased the stomatal limitation (Ls)”
e2“The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotary tillage under lower soil water content led to a decrease in net photosynthetic rate.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“indicating that RT treatment, which was under lower SWC, led to a decrease in Pn”
e6“The SS treatment decreased the stomatal limitation (Ls)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplemental irrigation under rotary tillage was able to compensate for leaf growth.
- Treatment
- supplemental irrigation under RT treatmente3
- Outcome
- growth of leavese3
- Direction
- compensate fore3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Applied supplemental irrigation under RT treatment was able to compensate for the growth of leaves, but could not reverse the decreasing trend in the gLAI”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Supplemental irrigation under rotary tillage could not reverse the decreasing trend in gLAI.
- Treatment
- supplemental irrigation under RT treatmente3
- Outcome
- decreasing trend in the gLAIe3
- Direction
- could not reversee3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Applied supplemental irrigation under RT treatment was able to compensate for the growth of leaves, but could not reverse the decreasing trend in the gLAI”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling improved water use efficiency by 9.1%–9.9% compared with rotary tillage.
- Treatment
- SS treatmente0
- Outcome
- WUEe0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 9.1%–9.9%e0
- Comparator
- rotary tillage (RT)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ultimately, the SS treatment improved WUE by 9.1%–9.9%, and increased grain yields by 10.0%–29.3%”
e2“The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling increased grain yield by 10.0%–29.3% compared with rotary tillage.
- Treatment
- SS treatmente0
- Outcome
- grain yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 10.0%–29.3%e0
- Comparator
- rotary tillage (RT)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ultimately, the SS treatment improved WUE by 9.1%–9.9%, and increased grain yields by 10.0%–29.3%”
e2“The main plots used tillage practices, including SS and rotary tillage (RT)”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The practice of subsoiling can improve leaf photosynthetic characteristics and WUE of rainfed summer maize.
- Outcome
- photosynthetic characteristics of leaves and WUEe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the practice of SS can improve the photosynthetic characteristics of leaves and WUE of rainfed summer maize”
t0“Rainfed Summer Maize”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · physiology: photosynthesis · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →tillage · physiology: gas exchange · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →tillage · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
79 papers more in this group
See all 83 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 papers →tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 papers →irrigation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
207 papers in the same direction as this paper · 80 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
285 papers more in this group
See all 289 papers →tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 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.