Abstract
Residual film pollution and excessive nitrogen fertilizer have become limiting factors for agricultural development. To investigate the feasibility of replacing conventional plastic film with biodegradable plastic film in cold and arid environments under nitrogen application conditions, field experiments were conducted from 2021 to 2022 with plastic film covering (including degradable plastic film (D) and ordinary plastic film (P)) combined with nitrogen fertilizer 0 (N0), 160 (N1), 320 (N2), and 480 (N3) kg·ha−1. The results showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in dry matter accumulation, photosynthetic gas exchange parameters, soil enzyme activity, or yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover compared to ordinary plastic film cover. Nitrogen fertilizer is the main factor limiting the growth of spring maize. The above-ground and root biomass showed a trend of increasing and then decreasing with the increase in nitrogen application level. Increasing nitrogen fertilizer can also improve the photosynthetic gas exchange parameters of leaves, maintain soil enzyme activity, and reduce soil pH. Under the nitrogen application level of N2, the yield of degradable plastic film and ordinary plastic film coverage increased by 3.74~42.50% and 2.05~40.02%, respectively. At the same time, it can also improve water use efficiency and irrigation water use efficiency, but it will reduce nitrogen fertilizer partial productivity and nitrogen fertilizer agronomic use efficiency. Using multiple indicators to evaluate the effect of plastic film mulching combined with nitrogen fertilizer on the comprehensive growth of spring maize, it was found that the DN2 treatment had the best complete growth of maize, which was the best model for achieving stable yield and income increase and green development of spring maize in cold and cool irrigation areas.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Degradable and ordinary plastic films did not differ significantly in dry matter accumulation.
- Treatment
- degradable plastic film covere0
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulatione0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Comparator
- ordinary plastic film covere0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in dry matter accumulation, photosynthetic gas exchange parameters, soil enzyme activity, or yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover compared to ordinary plastic film cover.”
Claim · model-written summary
Degradable and ordinary films did not differ significantly in photosynthetic gas exchange parameters.
- Treatment
- degradable plastic film covere0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic gas exchange parameterse0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Comparator
- ordinary plastic film covere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in dry matter accumulation, photosynthetic gas exchange parameters, soil enzyme activity, or yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover compared to ordinary plastic film cover.”
Claim · model-written summary
Degradable and ordinary films did not differ significantly in soil enzyme activity.
- Treatment
- degradable plastic film covere0
- Outcome
- soil enzyme activitye0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Comparator
- ordinary plastic film covere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in dry matter accumulation, photosynthetic gas exchange parameters, soil enzyme activity, or yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover compared to ordinary plastic film cover.”
Claim · model-written summary
Degradable and ordinary films did not differ significantly in maize yield.
- Treatment
- degradable plastic film covere0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Comparator
- ordinary plastic film covere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed no significant difference (p > 0.05) in dry matter accumulation, photosynthetic gas exchange parameters, soil enzyme activity, or yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover compared to ordinary plastic film cover.”
Claim · model-written summary
Above-ground and root biomass first increased then decreased with higher nitrogen application.
- Treatment
- nitrogen application levele0
- Outcome
- above-ground and root biomasse0
- Direction
- increasing and then decreasinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The above-ground and root biomass showed a trend of increasing and then decreasing with the increase in nitrogen application level.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher nitrogen fertilizer improved leaf photosynthetic gas exchange.
- Treatment
- Increasing nitrogen fertilizere0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic gas exchange parameters of leavese0
- Direction
- improvee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing nitrogen fertilizer can also improve the photosynthetic gas exchange parameters of leaves, maintain soil enzyme activity, and reduce soil pH.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher nitrogen fertilizer maintained soil enzyme activity.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing nitrogen fertilizer can also improve the photosynthetic gas exchange parameters of leaves, maintain soil enzyme activity, and reduce soil pH.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher nitrogen fertilizer reduced soil pH.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing nitrogen fertilizer can also improve the photosynthetic gas exchange parameters of leaves, maintain soil enzyme activity, and reduce soil pH.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
Claim · model-written summary
At N2, degradable film increased yield by 3.74~42.50%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under the nitrogen application level of N2, the yield of degradable plastic film and ordinary plastic film coverage increased by 3.74~42.50% and 2.05~40.02%, respectively.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
Claim · model-written summary
At N2, ordinary film increased yield by 2.05~40.02%.
- Treatment
- N2e0
- Outcome
- yield of degradable plastic film and ordinary plastic film coveragee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2.05~40.02%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under the nitrogen application level of N2, the yield of degradable plastic film and ordinary plastic film coverage increased by 3.74~42.50% and 2.05~40.02%, respectively.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
Claim · model-written summary
N2 improved water use and irrigation water use efficiency.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At the same time, it can also improve water use efficiency and irrigation water use efficiency, but it will reduce nitrogen fertilizer partial productivity and nitrogen fertilizer agronomic use efficiency.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
e1“Under the nitrogen application level of N2”
Claim · model-written summary
N2 reduced nitrogen fertilizer partial productivity and agronomic use efficiency.
- Outcome
- nitrogen fertilizer partial productivity and nitrogen fertilizer agronomic use efficiencye0
- Direction
- reducee0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At the same time, it can also improve water use efficiency and irrigation water use efficiency, but it will reduce nitrogen fertilizer partial productivity and nitrogen fertilizer agronomic use efficiency.”
t0“yield of spring maize under degradable plastic film cover”
Claim · model-written summary
DN2 had the best comprehensive maize growth and was recommended for stable yield and income.
- Treatment
- DN2 treatmente0
- Outcome
- best model for achieving stable yield and income increase and green developmente0
- Setting
- cold and cool irrigation arease0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it was found that the DN2 treatment had the best complete growth of maize, which was the best model for achieving stable yield and income increase and green development of spring maize in cold and cool irrigation areas.”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · physiology: photosynthesis · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
91 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
100 papers more in this group
See all 104 papers →mulching · soil: biology · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →mulching · physiology: photosynthesis · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 330 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 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.