ArticlePloS one2019
How do cotton light interception and carbohydrate partitioning respond to cropping systems including monoculture, intercropping with wheat, and direct-seeding after wheat?
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Non-targeted and targeted metabolomics profiling of tea plants (Camellia sinensis) in response to its intercropping with Chinese chestnut.BMC plant biology · 2021Article
- Cassava/peanut intercropping improves soil quality via rhizospheric microbes increased available nitrogen contents.BMC biotechnology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)-wheat (Triticum aestivum) planting patterns are widely applied in the Yellow River Valley of China, and crop yield mainly depends on light interception. However, little information is available on how cotton canopy light capturing and yield distribution are affected by planting patterns. Hence, field experiments were conducted in 2016 and 2017 to study the response of cotton canopy light interception, square and boll distribution, the leaf area index (LAI) and biomass accumulation to three planting patterns: a cotton monoculture (CM, planted on 15 May) system, a cotton/wheat relay intercropping (CWI, planted on 15 May) system, in which three rows of wheat rows were intercropped with one row of cotton, and a system in which cotton was directly seeded after wheat (CWD, planted on 15 June). The following results were obtained: 1) greater light capture capacity was observed for cotton plants in the CM and CWI compared with the CWD, and the light interception of the CM was 22.4% and 51.4% greater than that of the CWI and CWD, respectively, at 30 days after sowing (DAS) in 2016; 2) more bolls occurred at the first sympodial position (SP) than at other SPs for plants in the CM; 3) based on the LAI and biomass accumulation, the cotton growth rate was the greatest in CWD, followed by CM and CWI; and 4) the CM produced significantly greater yields than did the other two treatments because it yielded more bolls and greater boll weight. Information on the characteristics of cotton growth and development in response to different planting patterns would be helpful for understanding the response of cotton yields to planting patterns and would facilitate the improvement of cotton productivity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.