Abstract
Mulching and no-till are recommended practices to conserve soil water and soil health, but their effects on nutrient leaching in maize fields under monsoon rainfall need to be assessed. Soil water, soil temperature, and root and shoot growth of maize under plastic mulch, straw mulch, and no-till treatments were observed. Nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) leaching below a 110-cm deep lysimeter after heavy rainfall events were determined. The mulching and no-till treatments increased soil water content by 0.022–0.025 cm3/cm3 and reduced daytime soil temperature by 0.5–2.6 °C. Average leaching concentrations of total N and available P at 63 and 93 DAS (days after sowing) were 2.4 and 4.9 mg N/L and 0.12 and 0.08 mg P/L, respectively. For the control condition, the leaching concentrations of N and P decreased between 63 and 93 DAS. The mulching treatments did not influence nutrient leaching load at 63 DAS, but at 93 DAS the N leaching load increased by 181–248 g/ha and P load by 3.1–4.9 g/ha compared with the control treatment. The mulch treatments had taller shoots (5.1–18.3 cm) and a higher root-shoot ratio. The higher soil water content in the mulched treatments facilitated nutrient redistribution, plant growth, nutrient transport, and leaching. No-till increased N leaching by 103 g N/ha per leaching event but not P leaching. The no-till treatment had shorter shoots but longer roots than the conventional tillage treatment due to poor nutrient redistribution in the no-till soil. A modification in the nutrient management plan is needed to better control nutrient redistribution and minimize leaching.
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 19
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch and no-till increased soil water content by 0.022–0.025 cm3/cm3.
- Treatment
- mulching and no-till treatmentse0
- Outcome
- soil water contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 0.022–0.025 cm3/cm3e0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mulching and no-till treatments increased soil water content by 0.022–0.025 cm3/cm3 and reduced daytime soil temperature by 0.5–2.6 °C.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch and no-till reduced daytime soil temperature by 0.5–2.6 °C.
- Treatment
- mulching and no-till treatmentse0
- Outcome
- daytime soil temperaturee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 0.5–2.6 °Ce0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mulching and no-till treatments increased soil water content by 0.022–0.025 cm3/cm3 and reduced daytime soil temperature by 0.5–2.6 °C.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Average total N leaching concentration at 63 DAS was 2.4.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average leaching concentrations of total N and available P at 63 and 93 DAS (days after sowing) were 2.4 and 4.9 mg N/L and 0.12 and 0.08 mg P/L, respectively.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Average total N leaching concentration at 93 DAS was 4.9 mg N/L.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average leaching concentrations of total N and available P at 63 and 93 DAS (days after sowing) were 2.4 and 4.9 mg N/L and 0.12 and 0.08 mg P/L, respectively.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Average available P leaching concentration at 63 DAS was 0.12.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average leaching concentrations of total N and available P at 63 and 93 DAS (days after sowing) were 2.4 and 4.9 mg N/L and 0.12 and 0.08 mg P/L, respectively.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Average available P leaching concentration at 93 DAS was 0.08 mg P/L.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average leaching concentrations of total N and available P at 63 and 93 DAS (days after sowing) were 2.4 and 4.9 mg N/L and 0.12 and 0.08 mg P/L, respectively.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
N leaching concentration fell from 63 to 93 DAS in controls.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For the control condition, the leaching concentrations of N and P decreased between 63 and 93 DAS.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
P leaching concentration fell from 63 to 93 DAS in controls.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For the control condition, the leaching concentrations of N and P decreased between 63 and 93 DAS.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch did not influence nutrient leaching load at 63 DAS.
- Treatment
- mulching treatmentse0
- Outcome
- nutrient leaching loade0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
- Qualifier
- 63 DASe0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mulching treatments did not influence nutrient leaching load at 63 DAS, but at 93 DAS the N leaching load increased by 181–248 g/ha and P load by 3.1–4.9 g/ha compared with the control treatment.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch increased N leaching load at 93 DAS by 181–248 g/ha.
- Treatment
- mulching treatmentse0
- Outcome
- N leaching loade0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 181–248 g/hae0
- Qualifier
- 93 DASe0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mulching treatments did not influence nutrient leaching load at 63 DAS, but at 93 DAS the N leaching load increased by 181–248 g/ha and P load by 3.1–4.9 g/ha compared with the control treatment.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch increased P leaching load at 93 DAS by 3.1–4.9 g/ha.
- Treatment
- mulching treatmentse0
- Outcome
- P loade0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3.1–4.9 g/hae0
- Qualifier
- 93 DASe0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mulching treatments did not influence nutrient leaching load at 63 DAS, but at 93 DAS the N leaching load increased by 181–248 g/ha and P load by 3.1–4.9 g/ha compared with the control treatment.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch treatments produced shoots 5.1–18.3 cm taller.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mulch treatments had taller shoots (5.1–18.3 cm) and a higher root-shoot ratio.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch treatments increased root-shoot ratio.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The mulch treatments had taller shoots (5.1–18.3 cm) and a higher root-shoot ratio.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher soil water under mulch facilitated nutrient redistribution, plant growth, transport and leaching.
- Treatment
- mulched treatmentse0
- Outcome
- nutrient redistribution, plant growth, nutrient transport, and leachinge0
- Qualifier
- higher soil water contente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The higher soil water content in the mulched treatments facilitated nutrient redistribution, plant growth, nutrient transport, and leaching.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till increased N leaching by 103 g N/ha per event.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till increased N leaching by 103 g N/ha per leaching event but not P leaching.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till did not increase P leaching.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No-till increased N leaching by 103 g N/ha per leaching event but not P leaching.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till produced shorter shoots than conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- no-till treatmente0
- Outcome
- shootse0
- Direction
- shortere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The no-till treatment had shorter shoots but longer roots than the conventional tillage treatment due to poor nutrient redistribution in the no-till soil.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till produced longer roots than conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- no-till treatmente0
- Outcome
- rootse0
- Direction
- longere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The no-till treatment had shorter shoots but longer roots than the conventional tillage treatment due to poor nutrient redistribution in the no-till soil.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend modifying nutrient management to limit leaching.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“A modification in the nutrient management plan is needed to better control nutrient redistribution and minimize leaching.”
t0“Mulch and no-till impacts on nitrogen and phosphorus leaching in a maize field under sub-tropic monsoon climate”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →tillage · environment: emissions · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →mulching · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 46 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →mulching · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
108 papers more in this group
See all 112 papers →mulching · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
121 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
136 papers more in this group
See all 140 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
- negative
- negative
- no effect
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 papers →tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
86 papers in the same direction as this paper · 196 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 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.