Abstract
Optimizing tillage practices to improve crop yield and crop water productivity (CWP) is essential for promoting sustainable dryland agriculture. This meta-analysis used the water supply during the growing season (WS, total soil water storage at sowing time, and growing-season precipitation) instead of mean annual precipitation (MAP), to assess the effects of different tillage practices on the yield and CWP of winter wheat and spring maize in northern China. The results showed that WS had a stronger correlation with crop yield than MAP, especially for winter wheat. Compared with conventional tillage, no-tillage combined with straw mulching (SM) increased winter yield by 36.56 % and CWP by 17.93 % when WS ≤ 650 mm, and subsoiling tillage increased winter wheat yield by 21.17 % and CWP by 9.29 % in winter wheat yield when WS > 650 mm. SM and subsoiling tillage performed better in regions with higher mean annual temperature (MAT) than that with lower MAT. For spring maize, no tillage, no-tillage combined with plastic film mulching (PM), subsoiling tillage and rotary tillage significantly increased yield and CWP under different WS conditions and the highest effect was showed in PM under higher WS condition; meanwhile, PM and subsoiling tillage performed good under various temperature conditions, while rotary tillage performed better in areas with lower temperature. Thus, the recommended tillage practice for spring maize is PM in northeast China, and subsoiling tillage in north-central and northwest China; for winter wheat, subsoiling tillage is recommended for north-central China, and SM is recommended for northwest China. Taken together, our results indicate that it is more accurate to use WS rather than the MAP to evaluate appropriate tillage practices in drylands. Furthermore, WS can also replace MAP for yield estimation and prediction. • There is a strong correlation between water supply and crop yield in northern China. • Water supply could consider the mismatch between the growing period and rainfall. • Optimizing tillage practices based on water supply is accurate in northern China.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Growing-season water supply correlated more strongly with crop yield than annual precipitation, especially in winter wheat.
- Taxon
- winter wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Outcome
- crop yielde0
- Qualifier
- especially for winter wheate0
- Comparator
- MAPe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WS had a stronger correlation with crop yield than MAP, especially for winter wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw mulched no-tillage increased winter wheat yield by 36.56% under water supply of at most 650 mm.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- no-tillage combined with straw mulching (SM)e0
- Outcome
- winter yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 36.56 %e0
- Qualifier
- WS ≤ 650 mme0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared with conventional tillage, no-tillage combined with straw mulching (SM) increased winter yield by 36.56 % and CWP by 17.93 % when WS ≤ 650 mm”
t0“winter wheat and spring maize in northern China”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw mulched no-tillage increased winter wheat crop water productivity by 17.93% under water supply of at most 650 mm.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- no-tillage combined with straw mulching (SM)e0
- Outcome
- CWPe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 17.93 %e0
- Qualifier
- WS ≤ 650 mme0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared with conventional tillage, no-tillage combined with straw mulching (SM) increased winter yield by 36.56 % and CWP by 17.93 % when WS ≤ 650 mm”
t0“winter wheat and spring maize in northern China”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling increased winter wheat yield by 21.17% under water supply above 650 mm.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- subsoiling tillagee0
- Outcome
- winter wheat yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 21.17 %e0
- Qualifier
- WS > 650 mme0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“subsoiling tillage increased winter wheat yield by 21.17 % and CWP by 9.29 % in winter wheat yield when WS > 650 mm”
e1“Compared with conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling increased winter wheat crop water productivity by 9.29% under water supply above 650 mm.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- subsoiling tillagee0
- Outcome
- CWPe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 9.29 %e0
- Qualifier
- WS > 650 mme0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“subsoiling tillage increased winter wheat yield by 21.17 % and CWP by 9.29 % in winter wheat yield when WS > 650 mm”
e1“Compared with conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw mulching and subsoiling performed better in warmer regions.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- performed bettere0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- lower MATe0
- Setting
- regions with higher mean annual temperature (MAT)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SM and subsoiling tillage performed better in regions with higher mean annual temperature (MAT) than that with lower MAT”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
No tillage significantly increased spring maize yield and crop water productivity under varying water supply.
- Treatment
- no tillagee0
- Outcome
- yield and CWPe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- under different WS conditionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For spring maize, no tillage, no-tillage combined with plastic film mulching (PM), subsoiling tillage and rotary tillage significantly increased yield and CWP under different WS conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Plastic mulched no-tillage significantly increased spring maize yield and crop water productivity, with the greatest effect under higher water supply.
- Treatment
- no-tillage combined with plastic film mulching (PM)e0
- Outcome
- yield and CWPe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- the highest effect was showed in PM under higher WS conditione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For spring maize, no tillage, no-tillage combined with plastic film mulching (PM), subsoiling tillage and rotary tillage significantly increased yield and CWP under different WS conditions and the highest effect was showed in PM under higher WS condition”
Claim · model-written summary
Subsoiling significantly increased spring maize yield and crop water productivity under varying water supply and performed well across temperatures.
- Treatment
- subsoiling tillagee0
- Outcome
- yield and CWPe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- under various temperature conditionse1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For spring maize, no tillage, no-tillage combined with plastic film mulching (PM), subsoiling tillage and rotary tillage significantly increased yield and CWP under different WS conditions”
e1“PM and subsoiling tillage performed good under various temperature conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotary tillage significantly increased spring maize yield and crop water productivity and performed better in cooler areas.
- Treatment
- rotary tillagee0
- Outcome
- yield and CWPe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- areas with lower temperaturee1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For spring maize, no tillage, no-tillage combined with plastic film mulching (PM), subsoiling tillage and rotary tillage significantly increased yield and CWP under different WS conditions”
e1“rotary tillage performed better in areas with lower temperature”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend plastic mulched no-tillage for spring maize in northeast China.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the recommended tillage practice for spring maize is PM in northeast China”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend subsoiling for spring maize in north-central and northwest China.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“subsoiling tillage in north-central and northwest China”
e1“recommended tillage practice for spring maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend subsoiling for winter wheat in north-central China.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- subsoiling tillagee0
- Setting
- north-central Chinae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for winter wheat, subsoiling tillage is recommended for north-central China”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend straw mulching for winter wheat in northwest China.
- Taxon
- winter wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Outcome
- SMe0
- Setting
- northwest Chinae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SM is recommended for northwest China”
e1“for winter wheat, subsoiling tillage is recommended”
Claim · model-written summary
Growing-season water supply was judged more accurate than annual precipitation for selecting dryland tillage.
- Taxon
- wheat and maizeTriticum aestivum
Zea mayst0 - Outcome
- evaluate appropriate tillage practicese0
- Direction
- more accuratee0
- Comparator
- MAPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it is more accurate to use WS rather than the MAP to evaluate appropriate tillage practices in drylands”
t0“wheat and maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude growing-season water supply can replace annual precipitation in yield estimation and prediction.
- Taxon
- wheat and maizeTriticum aestivumZea mayst0
- Outcome
- yield estimation and predictione0
- Comparator
- MAPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WS can also replace MAP for yield estimation and prediction”
t0“wheat and maize”
The same questions in other papers
organic · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →tillage · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
113 papers more in this group
See all 117 papers →tillage · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
79 papers more in this group
See all 83 papers →mulching · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
107 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →organic · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
280 papers in the same direction as this paper · 35 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
318 papers more in this group
See all 322 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 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.