Abstract
Crop rotation is known as an eco-friendlier approach, as provides diversification in crop management systems, modifies intensive pressure on the agricultural ecosystem, utilizes various soil horizons, and prevents the establishment of specific pests and weeds. We set out here a study on the farms that have been managed over 50 years of specific continuous crop management programs. The experimental treatments were in a different management system: monoculture of maize, winter wheat, and soybean, 2-year crop rotation (winter wheat–maize) with and without chemical fertilizer, and 3-year crop rotation (winter wheat–soybean–maize) with and without chemical fertilizer and manure. We took soil samples six times from 2014 to 2017 prior to sowing and after harvesting each year. Weed seeds were extracted from soils and identified and counted by species. We, upon the data of a long term experiment of crop rotation, could conclude that crop rotations with more crops in the sequence are significantly effective in maintaining weed populations, a low-input crop production could reach a constant low population below an important damaging density, and therefore will be a more sustainable crop production while chemical fertilizers would change the soil’s chemical and structure and imbalance the plant population diversity and manures with high weed seed infestations have the potential to totally eradicate crop rotation effects, Therefore, clean manures or compost are highly recommended.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Rotations with more crops significantly maintained weed populations.
- Treatment
- crop rotations with more crops in the sequencee0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed populationse0
Zea maysNot reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“crop rotations with more crops in the sequence are significantly effective in maintaining weed populations”
e1“monoculture of maize, winter wheat, and soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Low-input crop production could maintain weed populations below damaging density.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a low-input crop production could reach a constant low population below an important damaging density”
e1“monoculture of maize, winter wheat, and soybean”
e2“Weed seeds were extracted from soils”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical fertilizers were said to imbalance plant population diversity through soil changes.
- Treatment
- chemical fertilizerse0
- Outcome
- plant population diversitye0
- Qualifier
- change the soil’s chemical and structuree0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“chemical fertilizers would change the soil’s chemical and structure and imbalance the plant population diversity”
e1“monoculture of maize, winter wheat, and soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Manure with many weed seeds could erase crop rotation effects.
- Treatment
- manures with high weed seed infestationse0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- crop rotation effectse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“manures with high weed seed infestations have the potential to totally eradicate crop rotation effects”
e1“monoculture of maize, winter wheat, and soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend clean manures or compost.
- Outcome
- clean manures or composte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“clean manures or compost are highly recommended”
e1“monoculture of maize, winter wheat, and soybean”
The same questions in other papers
rotation · weed · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 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.