Abstract
Abstract Soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.] yield loss from hailstorms depends on the growth stage when hail occurs and the magnitude of plant damage. We evaluated how soybean canopy recovery, yield, and seed quality were affected by simulated hail damage in Iowa and Indiana from 2016 to 2018. Five levels of hail damage were simulated by defoliating 0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 100% leaves at the full‐pod (R4) and beginning of seed‐fill (R5) stages. Canopy closure was similar for plants with 0%–50% defoliation but significantly reduced for plants with 75% and 100% defoliation. The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and normalized difference red edge index (NDRE) predicted defoliation levels better than canopy closure, with NDRE being more sensitive for detecting canopy variation among defoliation rates. Soybean yield and yield components decreased quadratically with increasing defoliation severity. Yield loss was minimal with 25% defoliation, regardless of growth stage or location. Soybean yield declined more with 100% defoliation at the R5 stage (80%–83%) compared to the R4 stage (67%–79%). The yield loss when plants were defoliated greater than 25% was due to a reduction in seed numbers (up to 54–88 seeds plant −1 ) and seed weight (up to 0.022–0.052 g seed −1 ). Defoliation at both stages minimally affected seed protein but decreased oil concentrations when defoliation reached 75%–100%. Soybean yield and seed quality loss should not be an issue of concern for fields with up to 25% hail defoliation damage at the R4–R5 stages. Results will help refine crop insurance guidelines, improving damage assessment for farmers.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Canopy closure was similar at 0%–50% defoliation.
- Taxon
- Soybean
Glycine maxt0 - Treatment
- 0%–50% defoliatione0
- Outcome
- Canopy closuree0
- Direction
- similare0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Canopy closure was similar for plants with 0%–50% defoliation”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Canopy closure was significantly reduced at 75% and 100% defoliation.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- 75% and 100% defoliatione0
- Outcome
- Canopy closuree0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- 0%–50% defoliatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Canopy closure was similar for plants with 0%–50% defoliation but significantly reduced for plants with 75% and 100% defoliation”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
NDVI and NDRE predicted defoliation levels better than canopy closure.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- predicted defoliation levelse0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- canopy closuree0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The normalized difference vegetation index (NDVI) and normalized difference red edge index (NDRE) predicted defoliation levels better than canopy closure”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
NDRE was more sensitive for detecting canopy variation among defoliation rates.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- detecting canopy variation among defoliation ratese0
- Comparator
- defoliation ratese0
Not reportedValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NDRE being more sensitive for detecting canopy variation among defoliation rates”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield and yield components decreased quadratically with defoliation severity.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- increasing defoliation severitye0
- Outcome
- yield and yield componentse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soybean yield and yield components decreased quadratically with increasing defoliation severity”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield loss was minimal at 25% defoliation.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- 25% defoliatione0
- Outcome
- Yield losse0
- Direction
- minimale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield loss was minimal with 25% defoliation, regardless of growth stage or location”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
At complete defoliation, R5 yield decline was 80%–83%.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxe0
- Organ / stage
- R5 stagee0
- Treatment
- 100% defoliatione0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- declined moree0
- Value
- 80%–83%e0
- Qualifier
- 67%–79%e0
- Comparator
- R4 stagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soybean yield declined more with 100% defoliation at the R5 stage (80%–83%) compared to the R4 stage (67%–79%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Loss after more than 25% defoliation reflected fewer seeds, up to 54–88 per plant.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- seed numberse0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 54–88 seeds plant −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduction in seed numbers (up to 54–88 seeds plant −1 )”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Loss after more than 25% defoliation reflected lower seed weight, up to 0.022–0.052 g per seed.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Outcome
- seed weighte0
- Value
- 0.022–0.052 g seed −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“seed weight (up to 0.022–0.052 g seed −1 )”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Defoliation minimally affected seed protein.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- Defoliatione0
- Outcome
- seed proteine0
- Direction
- minimally affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Defoliation at both stages minimally affected seed protein”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Defoliation of 75%–100% decreased seed oil concentration.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxt0
- Treatment
- defoliation reached 75%–100%e0
- Outcome
- oil concentrationse0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreased oil concentrations when defoliation reached 75%–100%”
t0“soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors concluded yield and quality loss should not concern fields with up to 25% hail damage at R4–R5.
- Taxon
- SoybeanGlycine maxe0
- Outcome
- should not be an issue of concern for fields with up to 25% hail defoliation damagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soybean yield and seed quality loss should not be an issue of concern for fields with up to 25% hail defoliation damage at the R4–R5 stages”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · quality: protein · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →pruning · growth · Glycine max (soybean)Results differ
31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →pruning · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
76 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
106 papers more in this group
See all 110 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.