Abstract
Water stress restricts grain yield in the Loess Plateau of China. Two experiments were conducted during three consecutive crop seasons to evaluate benefits of supplemental irrigation from harvested water. Twelve to 48 mm of irrigation was applied at growth stages of corn ( Zea mays L.) and winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) grown on soil covered with white plastic. Additional 7‐yr wheat and 4‐yr corn experiments focused on the use of plastic for water efficient use. Irrigation increased grain yield, water use efficiency (WUE), and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) for all years. The IWUEs from combined use of the plastic and 12 mm of irrigation were 6.36 kg m −3 for wheat at jointing stage and 18.05 kg m −3 for corn at V15 stage in a dry year, with IWUE two to six times greater than WUE. Relative to control conditions, plastic applied at seeding increased WUE from 0.77 to 0.98 kg m −3 for wheat and from 1.52 to 1.94 kg m −3 for corn, but greatest available soil water (ASW) and WUE were achieved when plastic was applied during fallow period before seeding. Grain yield–evapotranspiration relationships were linear with regression coefficients of 1.15 kg m −3 for wheat and 4.56 kg m −3 for corn. Most data points from plastic plots were above the regression line while most from the control plots were below the line, indicating increased WUE by the plastic. The ASW at seeding was more important for wheat than corn because sufficient rainfall normally occurs during corn season while the latter portion of wheat season is usually dry.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation increased grain yield, WUE and IWUE of corn and winter wheat in all years.
- Taxon
- corn ( Zea mays L.) and winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)
Triticum aestivum
Zea mayse0 - Treatment
- Irrigatione1
- Outcome
- grain yield, water use efficiency (WUE), and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE)e1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Qualifier
- for all yearse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Twelve to 48 mm of irrigation was applied at growth stages of corn ( Zea mays L.) and winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”
e1“Irrigation increased grain yield, water use efficiency (WUE), and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) for all years”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic applied at seeding increased WUE of winter wheat from 0.77 to 0.98 kg m −3 relative to control conditions.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume2
- Treatment
- plastic applied at seedinge2
- Outcome
- WUEe2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- from 0.77 to 0.98 kg m −3e2
- Comparator
- control conditionse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Relative to control conditions, plastic applied at seeding increased WUE from 0.77 to 0.98 kg m −3 for wheat and from 1.52 to 1.94 kg m −3 for corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic applied at seeding increased WUE of corn from 1.52 to 1.94 kg m −3 relative to control conditions.
- Taxon
- corn
Zea mays subsp. mayse2 - Treatment
- plastic applied at seedinge2
- Outcome
- WUEe2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- from 1.52 to 1.94 kg m −3e2
- Comparator
- control conditionse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Relative to control conditions, plastic applied at seeding increased WUE from 0.77 to 0.98 kg m −3 for wheat and from 1.52 to 1.94 kg m −3 for corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic applied during the fallow period before seeding gave the greatest available soil water and WUE, compared with plastic applied at seeding.
- Taxon
- corn ( Zea mays L.) and winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- plastic was applied during fallow period before seedinge3
- Outcome
- available soil water (ASW) and WUEe3
- Direction
- greateste3
- Comparator
- plastic applied at seedinge2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Twelve to 48 mm of irrigation was applied at growth stages of corn ( Zea mays L.) and winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”
e2“Relative to control conditions, plastic applied at seeding increased WUE from 0.77 to 0.98 kg m −3 for wheat and from 1.52 to 1.94 kg m −3 for corn”
e3“but greatest available soil water (ASW) and WUE were achieved when plastic was applied during fallow period before seeding”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic mulch shifted corn and winter wheat data points above the yield-evapotranspiration regression line, indicating increased WUE relative to control plots.
- Taxon
- corn ( Zea mays L.) and winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumZea mayse0
- Treatment
- plastice6
- Outcome
- WUEe6
- Direction
- increasede6
- Comparator
- control plotse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Twelve to 48 mm of irrigation was applied at growth stages of corn ( Zea mays L.) and winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”
e6“Most data points from plastic plots were above the regression line while most from the control plots were below the line, indicating increased WUE by the plastic”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield–evapotranspiration relationship for winter wheat was linear with a regression coefficient of 1.15 kg m −3.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume4
- Outcome
- Grain yield–evapotranspiration relationshipse4
- Value
- 1.15 kg m −3e4
- Qualifier
- lineare4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“Grain yield–evapotranspiration relationships were linear with regression coefficients of 1.15 kg m −3 for wheat and 4.56 kg m −3 for corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield–evapotranspiration relationship for corn was linear with a regression coefficient of 4.56 kg m −3.
- Taxon
- cornZea mays subsp. mayse4
- Outcome
- Grain yield–evapotranspiration relationshipse4
- Value
- 4.56 kg m −3e4
- Qualifier
- lineare4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“Grain yield–evapotranspiration relationships were linear with regression coefficients of 1.15 kg m −3 for wheat and 4.56 kg m −3 for corn”
Claim · model-written summary
Available soil water at seeding was more important for winter wheat than for corn.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume5
- Outcome
- ASW at seedinge5
- Direction
- more importante5
- Comparator
- corne5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“The ASW at seeding was more important for wheat than corn”
The same questions in other papers
rotation · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →rotation · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
299 papers more in this group
See all 303 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
283 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
320 papers more in this group
See all 324 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.