ArticlePlants (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Effects of Ridge and Furrow Planting Patterns on Crop Yield and Grain Quality in Dryland Maize-Wheat Double Cropping System.
Article in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Ridge and furrow planting is a prevalent drought-resistant cultivation technique in dryland regions. Notably, the effects of this technology on crop grain yield and quality in dryland maize-wheat double-cropping systems remain limited. This study utilized a long-term positioning experiment initiated in 2004, which included five treatments: a permanent ridge and furrow with a border ridge of 133 cm row space (PRFBR); a ridge and furrow created each year with a border ridge of 133 cm row space (EYRFBR); a permanent ridge with a normal ridge of 100 cm row space (PRFNR); a ridge and furrow created each year with a normal ridge of 100 cm row space (EYRFNR), and a conventional flat planting pattern according to the local farmer (CF). The crop grain yield in 2015-2021, as well as the protein and phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) content in maize and wheat grains, and the protein components in winter wheat grains in 2020-2021 were investigated. The results showed that, compared to CF, all four ridge and furrow planting patterns significantly enhanced crop yield in dry and normal years, and the effects varied depending on crop species, with increases of 45.3-97.8% for wheat and 11.0-33.8% increases annually in dry years; and 24.5-51.6% increases for maize and 12.2-37.5% increases annually in the normal years. EYRFBR treatment increased wheat grain P and K content by 24.3% and 13.7%, as well as increasing the total protein, albumin, gliadin, soluble protein, and storage protein content by 9.7%, 22.3%, 9.6%, 14.5%, and 5.6%, whereas PRFNR reduced the glutenin content and glutenin/gliadin ratio in winter wheat grains by 5.1% and 10.9%, respectively. The yield achieved with a permanent ridge and furrow (PRF) surpassed that achieved when the ridge and furrow was created anew each year (EYRF), yet the normal ridge width (NR) outperformed the border ridge width (BR). However, the P, K, protein, and protein component content in wheat grains under EYRF was superior to that under PRF. Comprehensive evaluations through principal component analysis (PCA) and TOPSIS analysis consistently demonstrated that the EYRFBR treatment delivered optimal performance in yield and quality for winter and annual, while PRFNR achieved superior yield for summer maize. Consequently, in dryland maize-wheat double-cropping systems, an EYRFBR planting pattern should be recommended for high-yield and high-quality wheat production; however, the PRFNR planting pattern is more suitable for summer maize production.
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.