Abstract
The Northeast Plain is the largest maize production area in China, and drip irrigation has recently been proposed to cope with the effects of frequent droughts and to improve water use efficiency (WUE). In order to develop an efficient and environmentally friendly irrigation system, drip irrigation experiments were conducted in 2016–2018 incorporating different soil water conservation measures as follows: (1) drip irrigation under plastic film mulch (PI), (2) drip irrigation under biodegradable film mulch (BI), (3) drip irrigation incorporating straw returning (SI), and (4) drip irrigation with the tape buried at a shallow soil depth (OI); with furrow irrigation (FI) used as the control. The results showed that PI and BI gave the highest maize yield, as well as the highest WUE and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) because of the higher root length density (RLD) and better heat conditions during the vegetative stage. But compared with BI, PI consumed more soil water in the 20–60 and 60–100 cm soil layers, and accelerated the progress of root and leaf senescence due to a larger root system in the top 0–20 cm soil layer and a higher soil temperature during the reproductive stage. SI was effective in improving soil water and nitrate contents, and promoted RLD in deeper soil layers, thereby maintaining higher physiological activity during the reproductive stage. FI resulted in higher nitrate levels in the deep 60–100 cm soil layer, which increased the risk of nitrogen losses by leaching compared with the drip irrigation treatments. RLD in the 0–20 cm soil layer was highly positively correlated with yield, WUE and NUE (P<0.001), but it was negatively correlated with root nitrogen use efficiency (NRE) (P<0.05), and the correlation was weaker in deeper soil layers. We concluded that BI had advantages in water–nitrogen utilization and yield stability response to drought stress, and thus is recommended for environmentally friendly and sustainable maize production in Northeast China.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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
Plastic-film drip irrigation gave the highest maize yield, WUE and NUE.
- Treatment
- drip irrigation under plastic film mulche1
- Outcome
- maize yield, as well as the highest WUE and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE)e0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- furrow irrigation (FI)e2
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PI and BI gave the highest maize yield, as well as the highest WUE and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE)”
e1“drip irrigation under plastic film mulch (PI)”
e2“furrow irrigation (FI) used as the control”
Claim · model-written summary
Biodegradable-film drip irrigation gave the highest maize yield, WUE and NUE.
- Treatment
- drip irrigation under biodegradable film mulche1
- Outcome
- maize yield, as well as the highest WUE and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE)e0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- furrow irrigation (FI)e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“PI and BI gave the highest maize yield, as well as the highest WUE and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE)”
e1“drip irrigation under biodegradable film mulch (BI)”
e2“furrow irrigation (FI) used as the control”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic-film irrigation consumed more soil water in two layers than biodegradable film.
- Treatment
- PIe0
- Outcome
- soil watere0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- 20–60 and 60–100 cm soil layerse0
- Comparator
- BIe0
Not reportedTaxonOrgan / stage
Verbatim
e0“compared with BI, PI consumed more soil water in the 20–60 and 60–100 cm soil layers”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic-film irrigation accelerated root and leaf senescence relative to biodegradable film.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“compared with BI, PI consumed more soil water in the 20–60 and 60–100 cm soil layers, and accelerated the progress of root and leaf senescence”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw-return drip irrigation improved soil water and nitrate contents.
- Treatment
- drip irrigation incorporating straw returninge1
- Outcome
- soil water and nitrate contentse0
- Direction
- improvinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SI was effective in improving soil water and nitrate contents”
e1“drip irrigation incorporating straw returning (SI)”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw-return drip irrigation promoted deeper root length density.
- Treatment
- drip irrigation incorporating straw returninge1
- Outcome
- RLD in deeper soil layerse0
- Direction
- promotede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SI was effective in improving soil water and nitrate contents, and promoted RLD in deeper soil layers”
e1“drip irrigation incorporating straw returning (SI)”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw-return drip irrigation maintained higher physiological activity during reproduction.
- Organ / stage
- reproductive stagee0
- Treatment
- drip irrigation incorporating straw returninge1
- Outcome
- physiological activitye0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“thereby maintaining higher physiological activity during the reproductive stage”
e1“drip irrigation incorporating straw returning (SI)”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Furrow irrigation produced higher deep-layer nitrate than drip treatments.
- Treatment
- FIe0
- Outcome
- nitrate levels in the deep 60–100 cm soil layere0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- drip irrigation treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FI resulted in higher nitrate levels in the deep 60–100 cm soil layer, which increased the risk of nitrogen losses by leaching compared with the drip irrigation treatments”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Furrow irrigation increased nitrogen leaching risk compared with drip treatments.
- Treatment
- FIe0
- Outcome
- risk of nitrogen losses by leachinge0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- drip irrigation treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FI resulted in higher nitrate levels in the deep 60–100 cm soil layer, which increased the risk of nitrogen losses by leaching compared with the drip irrigation treatments”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Topsoil root length density was positively correlated with yield, WUE and NUE.
- Organ / stage
- RLD in the 0–20 cm soil layere0
- Outcome
- yield, WUE and NUEe0
- Direction
- positively correlatede0
- Qualifier
- P<0.001e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“RLD in the 0–20 cm soil layer was highly positively correlated with yield, WUE and NUE (P<0.001)”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Topsoil root length density was negatively correlated with root nitrogen use efficiency.
- Organ / stage
- RLD in the 0–20 cm soil layere1
- Outcome
- root nitrogen use efficiency (NRE)e0
- Direction
- negatively correlatede0
- Qualifier
- P<0.05e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it was negatively correlated with root nitrogen use efficiency (NRE) (P<0.05)”
e1“RLD in the 0–20 cm soil layer”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The correlations of root length density with performance were weaker in deeper layers.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the correlation was weaker in deeper soil layers”
t0“spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend biodegradable-film drip irrigation for sustainable maize production in Northeast China.
- Treatment
- BIe0
- Outcome
- environmentally friendly and sustainable maize productione0
- Setting
- Northeast Chinae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“BI had advantages in water–nitrogen utilization and yield stability response to drought stress, and thus is recommended for environmentally friendly and sustainable maize production in Northeast China”
t0“spring maize”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · quality: postharvest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →irrigation · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →irrigation · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
83 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
100 papers more in this group
See all 104 papers →mulching · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 97 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
108 papers more in this group
See all 112 papers →mulching · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
107 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →organic · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
97 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
116 papers more in this group
See all 120 papers →organic · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
125 papers more in this group
See all 129 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 →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.