Abstract
Understanding the effects of limited irrigation on wheat yield and root characteristics is crucial for maintaining sustainable agricultural development in the groundwater-overexploitation zone of the North China Plain. We evaluated these effects in two winter wheat cultivars: Shimai22 (SM22, deep root system) and Shinong086 (SN086, shallow root system). Irrigation treatments were traditional irrigation twice (W2), no irrigation (W0), and single irrigation (W1) based on the number of leaves that unfolded in spring (3 L, 4 L, 5 L, and 6 L). Wheat grain yield, root characteristics, and root-shoot relationships were investigated according to growth chamber and field experiments. The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively. However, SM22 and SN086 exhibited the smallest yield reduction effect under 4 L and 3 L, with significant reductions of 10.4% and 16.2% compared to W2, respectively. The results of the growth chamber experiment showed that compared to W2, limited irrigation reduced the total root quantity, whereas no significant reductions were observed with the 3 L and 4 L. Meanwhile, SN086 increased root distribution in the deep layer at early single irrigation. Moreover, limited irrigation mainly affected the roots in the soil depth of 0–40 cm. Therefore, we analyzed the effects of limited irrigation on the wheat root system of the 0–40 cm soil depth under certain field conditions. Similarly, we found that limited irrigation reduced wheat root quantity. However, root weight density (RMD), root length density (RLD), and root surface area density (RSD) at 3 L and 4 L were significantly higher than those at 5 L and 6 L at the booting; those at 5 L and 6 L were significantly higher than those at 3 L and 4 L at milk ripening. The root quantity of SN086 was significantly higher than that of SM22. Root–shoot relationships showed that irrigation increased RMD, RSD, and RLD at the booting stage, while augmenting aboveground biomass, spike number, kernel number per spike, and grain yield. The earlier irrigation time in W1 was beneficial for increasing the drought resistance of roots and shoots; however, the later irrigation time resulted in higher RLD, RSD, and RMD at the milk-ripening stage, increasing kernel weight. Furthermore, SM22 had a lower root–shoot ratio, and SN086 had a higher root–shoot ratio under high-yield conditions. Therefore, 4 L single irrigation in spring for deep-rooted cultivars or 3 L single irrigation in spring for shallow-rooted cultivars is a suitable water-saving irrigation method to promote the establishment of the wheat root system, improve the drought resistance of the root system, increase aboveground biomass, and prolong spike development time, increasing spike and kernel numbers to improve the grain yield of winter wheat.
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 19
Claim · model-written summary
No irrigation (W0) reduced wheat yield by 50.9% relative to W2.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- W0e0
- Outcome
- wheat yielde0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 50.9%e0
- Comparator
- W2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Single irrigation (W1) reduced wheat yield by 23.0% relative to W2.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- W1e0
- Outcome
- wheat yielde0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 23.0%e0
- Comparator
- W2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
SM22 under 4 L irrigation showed a significant yield reduction of 10.4% relative to W2.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- SM22e1
- Treatment
- 4 Le1
- Outcome
- yield reduction effecte1
- Direction
- significant reductionse1
- Value
- 10.4%e1
- Comparator
- W2e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e1“However, SM22 and SN086 exhibited the smallest yield reduction effect under 4 L and 3 L, with significant reductions of 10.4% and 16.2% compared to W2, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
SN086 under 3 L irrigation showed a significant yield reduction of 16.2% relative to W2.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- SN086e1
- Treatment
- 3 Le1
- Outcome
- yield reduction effecte1
- Direction
- significant reductionse1
- Value
- 16.2%e1
- Comparator
- W2e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e1“However, SM22 and SN086 exhibited the smallest yield reduction effect under 4 L and 3 L, with significant reductions of 10.4% and 16.2% compared to W2, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Limited irrigation reduced total root quantity relative to W2 in the growth chamber experiment.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- limited irrigatione2
- Outcome
- total root quantitye2
- Direction
- reducede2
- Comparator
- W2e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e2“The results of the growth chamber experiment showed that compared to W2, limited irrigation reduced the total root quantity, whereas no significant reductions were observed with the 3 L and 4 L”
Claim · model-written summary
Total root quantity under 3 L and 4 L irrigation showed no significant reduction relative to W2.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- 3 L and 4 Le2
- Outcome
- total root quantitye2
- Direction
- no significant reductionse2
- Comparator
- W2e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e2“The results of the growth chamber experiment showed that compared to W2, limited irrigation reduced the total root quantity, whereas no significant reductions were observed with the 3 L and 4 L”
Claim · model-written summary
SN086 increased root distribution in the deep layer under early single irrigation.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- SN086e3
- Treatment
- early single irrigatione3
- Outcome
- root distribution in the deep layere3
- Direction
- increasede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e3“Meanwhile, SN086 increased root distribution in the deep layer at early single irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation increased root weight density, root surface area density and root length density at the booting stage.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- booting stagee4
- Treatment
- irrigatione4
- Outcome
- RMD, RSD, and RLDe4
- Direction
- increasede4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e4“Root–shoot relationships showed that irrigation increased RMD, RSD, and RLD at the booting stage, while augmenting aboveground biomass, spike number, kernel number per spike, and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation increased aboveground biomass, spike number and kernel number per spike.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- irrigatione4
- Outcome
- aboveground biomass, spike number, kernel number per spikee4
- Direction
- augmentinge4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e4“Root–shoot relationships showed that irrigation increased RMD, RSD, and RLD at the booting stage, while augmenting aboveground biomass, spike number, kernel number per spike, and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation increased grain yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- irrigatione4
- Outcome
- grain yielde4
- Direction
- augmentinge4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e4“Root–shoot relationships showed that irrigation increased RMD, RSD, and RLD at the booting stage, while augmenting aboveground biomass, spike number, kernel number per spike, and grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The earlier irrigation time in W1 was beneficial for increasing drought resistance of roots and shoots.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- earlier irrigation time in W1e5
- Outcome
- drought resistance of roots and shootse5
- Direction
- increasinge5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e5“The earlier irrigation time in W1 was beneficial for increasing the drought resistance of roots and shoots; however, the later irrigation time resulted in higher RLD, RSD, and RMD at the milk-ripening stage, increasing kernel weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Later irrigation time resulted in higher root length, surface area and weight densities at the milk-ripening stage.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- milk-ripening stagee5
- Treatment
- later irrigation timee5
- Outcome
- RLD, RSD, and RMDe5
- Direction
- highere5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e5“The earlier irrigation time in W1 was beneficial for increasing the drought resistance of roots and shoots; however, the later irrigation time resulted in higher RLD, RSD, and RMD at the milk-ripening stage, increasing kernel weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Later irrigation time increased kernel weight.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- later irrigation timee5
- Outcome
- kernel weighte5
- Direction
- increasinge5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e5“The earlier irrigation time in W1 was beneficial for increasing the drought resistance of roots and shoots; however, the later irrigation time resulted in higher RLD, RSD, and RMD at the milk-ripening stage, increasing kernel weight”
Claim · model-written summary
SN086 had significantly higher root quantity than SM22.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- SN086e6
- Outcome
- root quantitye6
- Direction
- significantly highere6
- Comparator
- SM22e6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e6“The root quantity of SN086 was significantly higher than that of SM22”
Claim · model-written summary
At the booting stage, 3 L and 4 L irrigation gave significantly higher root weight, length and surface area densities than 5 L and 6 L.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- bootinge7
- Treatment
- 3 L and 4 Le7
- Outcome
- root weight density (RMD), root length density (RLD), and root surface area density (RSD)e7
- Direction
- significantly highere7
- Comparator
- 5 L and 6 Le7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e7“root weight density (RMD), root length density (RLD), and root surface area density (RSD) at 3 L and 4 L were significantly higher than those at 5 L and 6 L at the booting; those at 5 L and 6 L were significantly higher than those at 3 L and 4 L at milk ripening”
Claim · model-written summary
At milk ripening, 5 L and 6 L irrigation gave significantly higher root weight, length and surface area densities than 3 L and 4 L.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- milk ripeninge7
- Treatment
- 5 L and 6 Le7
- Outcome
- root weight density (RMD), root length density (RLD), and root surface area density (RSD)e7
- Direction
- significantly highere7
- Comparator
- 3 L and 4 Le7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e7“root weight density (RMD), root length density (RLD), and root surface area density (RSD) at 3 L and 4 L were significantly higher than those at 5 L and 6 L at the booting; those at 5 L and 6 L were significantly higher than those at 3 L and 4 L at milk ripening”
Claim · model-written summary
SM22 had a lower root–shoot ratio.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- SM22e6
- Outcome
- root–shoot ratioe6
- Direction
- lowere6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e6“Furthermore, SM22 had a lower root–shoot ratio, and SN086 had a higher root–shoot ratio under high-yield conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
SN086 had a higher root–shoot ratio under high-yield conditions.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- SN086e6
- Outcome
- root–shoot ratioe6
- Direction
- highere6
- Qualifier
- under high-yield conditionse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the wheat yield of W0 and W1 were 50.9% and 23.0% less than that of W2, respectively”
e6“Furthermore, SM22 had a lower root–shoot ratio, and SN086 had a higher root–shoot ratio under high-yield conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
A single spring irrigation of 4 L for deep-rooted or 3 L for shallow-rooted wheat cultivars is a suitable water-saving irrigation method.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume6
- Treatment
- 4 L single irrigation in springe6
- Outcome
- suitable water-saving irrigation methode6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“Therefore, 4 L single irrigation in spring for deep-rooted cultivars or 3 L single irrigation in spring for shallow-rooted cultivars is a suitable water-saving irrigation method to promote the establishment of the wheat root system”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
176 papers in the same direction as this paper · 61 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
238 papers more in this group
See all 242 papers →irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- positive
985 papers more in this group
See all 989 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.