Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage maize had a higher cost benefit ratio of 1: 5.9 versus 1: 3.9.
- Treatment
- zero tillage maizee0
- Outcome
- cost benefit ratioe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1: 5.9e0
- Qualifier
- 1: 3.9e0
- Comparator
- farmers practicee0
Zea maysNot reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSetting
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cost benefit ratio was higher with zero tillage maize (1: 5.9) compared to farmers practice (1: 3.9)”
Title
C. Radha Kumari; M. John Sudheer Progressive Agriculture 2016. doi:10.5958/0976-4615.2016.00019.3
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Intervention effect Zero tillage increased maize cob length to 17.4 cm versus 15.5 cm under farmer practice.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage increased maize grain weight per plant to 129 gm versus 115 gm.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage increased maize grains per cob to 421 versus 385.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage increased maize 100 grain weight to 26.2 gm versus 23.6 gm.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage increased maize grain yield to 6250 Kg ha-1, 11.4% above farmer practice.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage increased maize stover yield to 7750 Kg ha-1, 6.9% above farmer practice.
- Intervention effect Gross returns per hectare were higher under zero tillage maize.
- Intervention effect Net returns per hectare were higher under zero tillage maize.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage reduced maize cultivation cost by 27.3% relative to farmer practice.