Abstract
Mono-cropping systems consisting of general low-yielding cereals are crucial productivity constraints in dry areas of the Mediterranean region. A crop rotation consisting of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.)–wheat (Triticum aestivum L)-chickpea (Cicer arietinum) was compared with monocropping in the Mediterranean region of Turkey. A four year crop rotation trial was set up in Adana, Turkey. A total of nine crop rotation systems of Quinoa (Q), chickpea (L) and wheat (W) were considered in this study. The four year results revealed that there was significant difference in grain and biomass yields, but no significant difference in plant height, harvest index, and 1000 grain weight of wheat among the treatments in crop rotation except number of grains per spike and soil organic matter. Continuous wheat and chickpea-wheat-chickpea-wheat (LWLW) produced significantly greater grain yield in 2010/2011 and 2011/2012. QWLW and QWQW rotation produced significantly lower biomass yield in 2008/2009. The maximum biomass yield of LWLW rotation resulted in 2011/2012 growing season. Therefore, the effect of previous crop on wheat grain and biomass yield in the four years of the rotation study was significantly different. In the long run, the favorable effects of legume-based rotations on crop yields and water productivity are apparent. Keywords: crop rotation system, monocropping system, quinoa, Chenopodium quinoa, chickpea, dryland, yield DOI: 10.25165/j.ijabe.20171005.3443 Citation: Tekin S, Yazar A, Barut H. Comparison of wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems under dryland Mediterranean conditions. Int J Agric & Biol Eng, 2017; 10(5): 203–213.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Rotation treatments differed significantly in wheat grain yield.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- rotation systemst0
- Outcome
- graine0
- Comparator
- monocropping systemst0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was significant difference in grain and biomass yields”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotation treatments differed significantly in wheat biomass yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- rotation systemst0
- Outcome
- biomass yieldse0
- Comparator
- monocropping systemst0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was significant difference in grain and biomass yields”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat plant height did not differ significantly among rotation treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- treatments in crop rotatione0
- Outcome
- plant heighte0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant difference in plant height, harvest index, and 1000 grain weight of wheat among the treatments in crop rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat harvest index did not differ significantly among rotation treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- treatments in crop rotatione0
- Outcome
- harvest indexe0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant difference in plant height, harvest index, and 1000 grain weight of wheat among the treatments in crop rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat 1000 grain weight did not differ significantly among rotation treatments.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- treatments in crop rotatione0
- Outcome
- 1000 grain weighte0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant difference in plant height, harvest index, and 1000 grain weight of wheat among the treatments in crop rotation”
Claim · model-written summary
Grains per wheat spike differed among rotations.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- rotation systemst0
- Outcome
- number of grains per spikee0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“except number of grains per spike and soil organic matter”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil organic matter differed among rotations.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- rotation systemst0
- Outcome
- soil organic mattere0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“except number of grains per spike and soil organic matter”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous wheat produced significantly greater grain yield in 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Continuous wheate0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- 2010/2011 and 2011/2012e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Continuous wheat and chickpea-wheat-chickpea-wheat (LWLW) produced significantly greater grain yield in 2010/2011 and 2011/2012”
Claim · model-written summary
LWLW rotation produced significantly greater grain yield in 2010/2011 and 2011/2012.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- chickpea-wheat-chickpea-wheat (LWLW)e0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- 2010/2011 and 2011/2012e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Continuous wheat and chickpea-wheat-chickpea-wheat (LWLW) produced significantly greater grain yield in 2010/2011 and 2011/2012”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
QWLW rotation produced significantly lower biomass yield in 2008/2009.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- QWLWe0
- Outcome
- biomass yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- 2008/2009e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“QWLW and QWQW rotation produced significantly lower biomass yield in 2008/2009”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
QWQW rotation produced significantly lower biomass yield in 2008/2009.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- QWQW rotatione0
- Outcome
- biomass yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- 2008/2009e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“QWLW and QWQW rotation produced significantly lower biomass yield in 2008/2009”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
LWLW rotation had maximum biomass yield in 2011/2012.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- LWLW rotatione0
- Outcome
- biomass yielde0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Qualifier
- 2011/2012 growing seasone0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The maximum biomass yield of LWLW rotation resulted in 2011/2012 growing season”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Legume-based rotations were judged to benefit crop yield over the long run.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- crop yieldse0
- Qualifier
- In the long rune0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the long run, the favorable effects of legume-based rotations on crop yields and water productivity are apparent.”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Legume-based rotations were judged to benefit water productivity over the long run.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- water productivitye0
- Qualifier
- In the long rune0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the long run, the favorable effects of legume-based rotations on crop yields and water productivity are apparent.”
t0“wheat-based rotation systems and monocropping systems”
The same questions in other papers
rotation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 papers →rotation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 83 in the opposite direction · 9 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
341 papers more in this group
See all 345 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.