Abstract
Abstract The distinct soil physicochemical properties of saline‐alkali farmland often lead to nutrient deficiencies, particularly in nitrogen. Both straw return and tillage are essential practices for modifying saline‐alkali soils, however, their combined effects on soil properties, nitrogen(N) transformation and absorption, as well the crop yield remain inadequately understood. A field experiment was conducted to assess the cumulative impacts of straw return and tillage (rotary tillage, deep tillage and subsoiling) on soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield. The results revealed that the soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) significantly decreased from the 0–20 cm layer to the 20–40 cm layer, indicating that deep tillage was less effective on salt accumulation in the surface soil. The return of straw return and tillage practices significantly influenced the fractions of soil organic nitrogen (SON) and the distribution percentage in total nitrogen. Additionally, these practices notably interacted to increase soil acid insoluble‐N, active SON and stable SON. The combination of straw return and rotary tillage resulted in a higher content of stable SON in the 0–20 cm soil layer. Conversely, the combination of straw return and subsoiling proved to be more effective on soil available N and active SON supplying, as well as maintaining stable nitrogen levels. Furthermore, straw return combined with subsoiling achieved the highest plant nitrogen uptake and yield, with increases of 21.7% and 38.2%, respectively, compared to the rotary without straw. Principal component analysis (PCA) revealed that stable SON was the primary contributor influencing maize yield, while inorganic N in the 0–20 cm layer and hydrolysable ammonium nitrogen (NH 4 + ‐N) in the 20–40 cm were also the closely related factors. These results provide a new insight for implementing straw return measures to enhance soil quality and increase crop production in saline‐alkali farmland.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Soil pH and electrical conductivity decreased significantly from the 0–20 cm layer to the 20–40 cm layer.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e1“the soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) significantly decreased from the 0–20 cm layer to the 20–40 cm layer”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw return combined with subsoiling increased plant nitrogen uptake by 21.7% compared with rotary tillage without straw.
- Treatment
- straw return combined with subsoilinge3
- Outcome
- plant nitrogen uptakee3
- Direction
- increasese3
- Value
- 21.7%e3
- Comparator
- rotary without strawe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e3“straw return combined with subsoiling achieved the highest plant nitrogen uptake and yield, with increases of 21.7% and 38.2%, respectively, compared to the rotary without straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw return combined with subsoiling increased maize yield by 38.2% compared with rotary tillage without straw.
- Treatment
- straw return combined with subsoilinge3
- Outcome
- yielde3
- Direction
- increasese3
- Value
- 38.2%e3
- Comparator
- rotary without strawe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e3“straw return combined with subsoiling achieved the highest plant nitrogen uptake and yield, with increases of 21.7% and 38.2%, respectively, compared to the rotary without straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw return and tillage practices significantly influenced the fractions of soil organic nitrogen.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e4“The return of straw return and tillage practices significantly influenced the fractions of soil organic nitrogen (SON)”
Claim · model-written summary
The combination of straw return and rotary tillage gave a higher content of stable SON in the 0–20 cm soil layer.
- Treatment
- combination of straw return and rotary tillagee5
- Outcome
- content of stable SONe5
- Direction
- highere5
- Setting
- 0–20 cm soil layere5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e5“The combination of straw return and rotary tillage resulted in a higher content of stable SON in the 0–20 cm soil layer”
Claim · model-written summary
The combination of straw return and subsoiling was more effective on soil available N and active SON supplying, and maintained stable nitrogen levels.
- Treatment
- combination of straw return and subsoilinge6
- Outcome
- soil available N and active SON supplyinge6
- Direction
- more effectivee6
- Qualifier
- maintaining stable nitrogen levelse6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e6“the combination of straw return and subsoiling proved to be more effective on soil available N and active SON supplying, as well as maintaining stable nitrogen levels”
Claim · model-written summary
Stable SON was the primary contributor influencing maize yield in the principal component analysis.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e7“stable SON was the primary contributor influencing maize yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Inorganic N in the 0–20 cm layer and hydrolysable ammonium N were closely related to maize yield.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e4“inorganic N in the 0–20 cm layer and hydrolysable ammonium nitrogen”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw return and tillage practices interacted to increase soil acid insoluble-N, active SON and stable SON.
- Treatment
- these practicese5
- Outcome
- soil acid insoluble‐N, active SON and stable SONe5
- Direction
- increasee5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“soil salinity, nitrogen transformation and maize yield”
e5“these practices notably interacted to increase soil acid insoluble‐N, active SON and stable SON”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →organic · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →organic · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →tillage · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
67 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
78 papers more in this group
See all 82 papers →organic · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
97 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
116 papers more in this group
See all 120 papers →tillage · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
92 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →organic · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
369 papers more in this group
See all 373 papers →tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 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.