You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Plastic-Film Mulching for Enhanced Water-Use Efficiency and Economic Returns from Maize Fields in Semiarid China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2017.00512 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Peng Zhang, Ting Wei, Tie Cai, Shahzad Ali, Qingfang Han, Xiaolong Ren, Zhikuan Jia |
| Abstract |
Film mulch has gradually been popularized to increase water availability to crops for improving and stabilizing agricultural production in the semiarid areas of Northwest China. To find more sustainable and economic film mulch methods for alleviating drought stress in semiarid region, it is necessary to test optimum planting methods in same cultivation conditions. A field experiment was conducted during 2013 and 2014 to evaluate the effects of different plastic film mulch methods on soil water, soil temperature, water use efficiency (WUE), yield and revenue. The treatments included: (i) the control, conventional flat planting without plastic film mulch (CK); (ii) flat planting with maize rows (60 cm spacing) on plastic film mulch (70 cm wide); (iii) furrow planting of maize (60 cm spacing), separated by consecutive plastic film-mulched ridges (each 50 cm wide and 15 cm tall); (iv) furrow planting of maize (60 cm spacing), separated by alternating large and small plastic film-mulched ridges (large ridges: 70 cm wide and 15 cm tall, small ridges 50 cm wide and 10 cm tall); and (v) furrow-flat planting of maize (60 cm spacing) with a large plastic film-mulched ridge (60 cm wide and 15 cm tall) alternating with a flat without plastic film-mulched space (60 cm wide). Topsoil temperature (5-25 cm) was significantly (p < 0.05) higher in field plots with plastic film mulch than the control (CK), and resulted in greater soil water storage (0-200 cm) up to 40 days after planting. Maize grain yield and WUE were significantly (p < 0.05) higher with the furrow planting methods (consecutive film-mulched ridges and alternating film-mulched ridges) than the check in both years. Maize yield was, on average, 29% (p < 0.05) greater and 28% (p < 0.05) greater with these furrow planting methods, while the average WUE increased by 22.8% (p < 0.05) with consecutive film-mulched ridges and 21.1% (p < 0.05) with alternating film-mulched ridges. The 2-year average net income increased by 1559, 528, and 350 Chinese Yuan (CNY) ha(-1) with the consecutive film-mulched ridges, furrow-flat planting and alternating film-mulched ridges, respectively, compared with the control (CK). We conclude that the consecutive film-mulched ridge method was the most productive and profitable for maize in this semi-arid area with limited and erratic precipitation. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Philippines | 1 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 50 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 18% |
| Researcher | 8 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 12% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 8% |
| Unknown | 17 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 23 | 45% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 3 | 6% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 2% |
| Decision Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 20 | 39% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 May 2017.
All research outputs
#17,892,691
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#12,158
of 20,408 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#220,949
of 309,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#376
of 551 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,408 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 551 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.