Abstract
Reduction of 20% irrigation combined with organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen (I1F2) enhanced maize yield and quality I1F2 improved maize yield and quality by regulating the photo-physiological traits and nitrogen transportation I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize. Ensuring an adequate and nutritious food supply for the global population is a significant challenge in agricultural production practice. Water and fertilizer are the main limiting factors in improving crop yield and quality. However, organic fertilizer substitution with partial chemical nitrogen combined with irrigation reduction can increase maize yield and quality, through improvements in photo-physiological traits and nitrogen transportation, remains unclear. A split plot field experiment of maize was established in an arid area of northwestern China from 2021 to 2023. Two irrigation levels formed the main plot, local conventional irrigation (I2, 4,050 m 3 ha −1 ) and reduced by 20% (I1, 3,240 m 3 ha −1 ). Five equivalent nitrogen substitution ratios of chemical nitrogen with organic fertilizers formed split plot, including sole chemical nitrogen fertilizer (F1), organic fertilizer substituting at 25% (F2), 50% (F3), 75% (F4), and 100% (F5) of chemical nitrogen fertilizer. Discussing the effect of maize yield, quality, photo-physiological traits, and nitrogen transportation with combining organic and chemical nitrogen fertilizers under reduced irrigation. The results showed that reduced irrigation decreased maize yield and quality. However, organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen increased maize yield and quality, with this effect greater than other equivalent nitrogen substitution ratios of chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer. Reduced by 20% irrigation combined with organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen (I1F2) increased maize grain yield and biomass by 13.0 and 8.9% compared to local conventional irrigation and sole chemical nitrogen fertilizer (I2F1). Meanwhile, I1F2 improved grain protein by 10.0%, enhanced amino acid and vitamin B contents by 60.4 and 30.6%, and raised straw crude fat and crude protein contents by 23.1 and 5.6% compared to I2F1 in maize, respectively. The reason for improving maize yield and quality with I1F2 was attributed to (1) improving leaf area index and leaf area duration at the R2−R4 stage by 6.2 and 4.1%, increasing net photosynthetic rate by 43.8%, and enhancing the activities of pyruvate phosphate dikinase, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase, and Rubisco activities by 9.8, 9.7, and 10.5%, respectively; (2) promoting nitrogen uptake and nitrogen accumulation after the R1 stage by 5.6 and 5.4% while maintaining nitrogen transportation quantity before the R1 stage. Therefore, reduced irrigation by 20% combined with organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen can improve maize yield and quality via improving photo-physiological traits and nitrogen transportation in arid irrigation areas.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced irrigation decreased maize yield and quality.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reduced irrigation decreased maize yield and quality”
Claim · model-written summary
At 25% substitution, organic fertilizer increased maize yield and quality more than other ratios.
- Treatment
- organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogene0
- Outcome
- maize yield and qualitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- other equivalent nitrogen substitution ratios of chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen increased maize yield and quality, with this effect greater than other equivalent nitrogen substitution ratios of chemical fertilizer with organic fertilizer”
t0“maize yield”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 increased grain yield by 13.0% versus I2F1.
- Treatment
- Reduced by 20% irrigation combined with organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen (I1F2)e0
- Outcome
- maize grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 13.0e0
- Comparator
- local conventional irrigation and sole chemical nitrogen fertilizer (I2F1)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduced by 20% irrigation combined with organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen (I1F2) increased maize grain yield and biomass by 13.0 and 8.9% compared to local conventional irrigation and sole chemical nitrogen fertilizer (I2F1)”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 increased biomass by 8.9% versus I2F1.
- Treatment
- Reduced by 20% irrigation combined with organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen (I1F2)e0
- Outcome
- biomasse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 8.9%e0
- Comparator
- local conventional irrigation and sole chemical nitrogen fertilizer (I2F1)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduced by 20% irrigation combined with organic fertilizer substitution at 25% of chemical nitrogen (I1F2) increased maize grain yield and biomass by 13.0 and 8.9% compared to local conventional irrigation and sole chemical nitrogen fertilizer (I2F1)”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 improved grain protein by 10.0%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“I1F2 improved grain protein by 10.0%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 enhanced amino acid content by 60.4%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“enhanced amino acid and vitamin B contents by 60.4 and 30.6%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 enhanced vitamin B content by 30.6%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“enhanced amino acid and vitamin B contents by 60.4 and 30.6%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 raised straw crude fat by 23.1%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“raised straw crude fat and crude protein contents by 23.1 and 5.6% compared to I2F1 in maize”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 raised straw crude protein by 5.6%.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“raised straw crude fat and crude protein contents by 23.1 and 5.6% compared to I2F1 in maize”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 improved leaf area index by 6.2% at R2−R4.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improving leaf area index and leaf area duration at the R2−R4 stage by 6.2 and 4.1%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 improved leaf area duration by 4.1% at R2−R4.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improving leaf area index and leaf area duration at the R2−R4 stage by 6.2 and 4.1%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 increased net photosynthesis by 43.8%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increasing net photosynthetic rate by 43.8%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 enhanced pyruvate phosphate dikinase activity by 9.8%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“enhancing the activities of pyruvate phosphate dikinase, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase, and Rubisco activities by 9.8, 9.7, and 10.5%, respectively”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 enhanced phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase activity by 9.7%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“enhancing the activities of pyruvate phosphate dikinase, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase, and Rubisco activities by 9.8, 9.7, and 10.5%, respectively”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 enhanced Rubisco activity by 10.5%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“enhancing the activities of pyruvate phosphate dikinase, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase, and Rubisco activities by 9.8, 9.7, and 10.5%, respectively”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 promoted nitrogen uptake by 5.6%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“promoting nitrogen uptake and nitrogen accumulation after the R1 stage by 5.6 and 5.4%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 promoted nitrogen accumulation after R1 by 5.4%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“promoting nitrogen uptake and nitrogen accumulation after the R1 stage by 5.6 and 5.4%”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
I1F2 maintained nitrogen transport before R1.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maintaining nitrogen transportation quantity before the R1 stage”
t0“maize yield”
e1“I1F2 had the highest comprehensive evaluation index of maize”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: general · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →nitrogen · quality: general · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 papers →fertilization · quality: general · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
85 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
99 papers more in this group
See all 103 papers →irrigation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
207 papers in the same direction as this paper · 80 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
285 papers more in this group
See all 289 papers →nitrogen · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
618 papers in the same direction as this paper · 115 in the opposite direction · 14 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
744 papers more in this group
See all 748 papers →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
790 papers in the same direction as this paper · 209 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 papers →fertilization · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1,195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 149 in the opposite direction · 20 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
1,361 papers more in this group
See all 1,365 papers →nitrogen · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1,905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 234 in the opposite direction · 45 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
2,181 papers more in this group
See all 2,185 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.