Effects of ridge-furrow with plastic film mulching combining with various urea types on water productivity and yield of potato in a dryland farming system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ridge-furrow with plastic film mulching (RM) has the potential to enhance crop yields and water productivity, particularly in semi-arid regions. However, the combined effects of RM and various urea types on rainfed potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) production remain unclear. A three-year field experiment (2018–2020) was conducted to elucidate the effects of the RM combined with various urea types on water productivity, tuber yield, and economic benefits in a dryland farming system. Treatments consisted of two mulching patterns [RM and no plastic film mulching (NM)], combined with the application of three urea types [common urea (U), controlled-release urea (C), and mixed C and U at a ratio of 1:1 (CU)]. Our results indicated that compared to NM, the RM system reduced soil evaporative losses, which ultimately increased average soil water storage for the 0–60 cm soil layer by 6.7% (P < 0.05). In addition, RM increased the mean soil temperature for the 0–10 cm soil layer by 1.4 °C compared with NM. These changes in soil under RM helped increase plant height, leaf chlorophyll, and nitrogen balance index, but reduced leaf flavonoid, thereby improving tuber yield. The application of CU further improved plant height, leaf chlorophyll, and nitrogen balance index, which allowed the exploitation of more soil water to increase tuber yield and water productivity (P < 0.05). The interactions of mulching and urea type had significant influence on the tuber yield, water productivity, and partial factor productivity of nitrogen, especially with the RMCU. RMCU significantly (P < 0.05) increased potato yield (up to 23.5%), water productivity (23.7%), partial factor productivity of nitrogen (23.5%), and economic benefit (38.4%), compared to the NMU during both drought and non-drought growing seasons. We conclude that compared with other treatments, RMCU resulted in the highest tuber yield, water productivity, and economic benefit across three growing seasons and should be considered an effective strategy to foster sustainable potato production in dryland farming systems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".