Abstract
Abstract Crop rotations, cover crops, and manures may enhance yields, improve soils, and provide other ecosystem services. However, farmers may be reluctant to adopt the aforementioned practices because of uncertain profits. This study determined the profitability of cotton ( Gossypium hirsutum L.) rotated with other crops and also utilizing cover crops and poultry litter (PL). Whole‐block treatments were 10 sequences of no‐tillage cotton, corn ( Zea mays L.), and soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.] at Milan, TN. Sequences were repeated in 4‐yr cycles called Phases (Phases I, II, III, and IV) starting in 2002 and continuing through 2017 to assess effects of consecutive applications of sequences on cotton net returns (NRs). Split‐block treatments included winter wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.), hairy vetch ( Vicia villosa L.), PL, and fallow. The ANOVA was used to determine treatment NR differences compared to continuous cotton and fallow for 2002–2017 and for each Phase. Including soybean and corn in rotation with cotton did not positively affect cotton NRs in Phases I, II, and III. Droughts may explain lack of yield and NR response in Phases II and III. However, including soybean and corn in the rotation provided higher cotton NRs in Phase IV (2014–2017). Better weather and improved soils with residue diversity in Phase IV may explain higher yields and NRs of cotton in rotation with other crops. For cover crops and PL, yield benefits and/or N fertilizer savings did not offset input costs, indicating monetary incentives may be needed for famers to include these practices in their cropping system.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Including soybean and corn in rotation with cotton did not positively affect cotton net returns in Phases I, II and III.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- Including soybean and corn in rotation with cottone0
- Outcome
- cotton NRse0
- Direction
- did not positively affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton profitability”
e0“Including soybean and corn in rotation with cotton did not positively affect cotton NRs in Phases I, II, and III”
Claim · model-written summary
Including soybean and corn in the rotation gave higher cotton net returns in Phase IV.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- including soybean and corn in the rotatione0
- Outcome
- cotton NRse0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton profitability”
e0“including soybean and corn in the rotation provided higher cotton NRs in Phase IV”
Claim · model-written summary
For cover crops and poultry litter, yield benefits and/or N fertilizer savings did not offset input costs.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- cover crops and PLe0
- Outcome
- yield benefits and/or N fertilizer savingse0
- Direction
- did not offsete0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton profitability”
e0“For cover crops and PL, yield benefits and/or N fertilizer savings did not offset input costs”
Claim · model-written summary
Droughts may explain the lack of yield and net return response to rotation in Phases II and III.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- lack of yield and NR responsee0
- Qualifier
- Droughtse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton profitability”
e0“Droughts may explain lack of yield and NR response in Phases II and III”
Claim · model-written summary
Better weather and improved soils with residue diversity in Phase IV may explain higher yields and net returns of cotton in rotation with other crops.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Outcome
- higher yields and NRse0
- Qualifier
- Better weather and improved soils with residue diversitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton profitability”
e0“Better weather and improved soils with residue diversity in Phase IV may explain higher yields and NRs of cotton in rotation with other crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Monetary incentives may be needed for farmers to include cover crops and poultry litter in their cropping system.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Outcome
- monetary incentivese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton profitability”
e0“monetary incentives may be needed for famers to include these practices in their cropping system”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays subsp. mays · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- negative
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →Glycine max · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →cover crop · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →rotation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- positive
39 papers more in this group
See all 43 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.