Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Conventional tillage gave maximum tiller number in both years.

A claim from SORGHUM GROWTH, PRODUCTIVITY, QUALITY AND ECONOMICS INFLUENCED BY TILLAGE METHODS AND INTEGRATED NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT · 2013

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage gave maximum tiller number in both years.

Taxon
SORGHUMSorghumt0
Treatment
conventional tillagee0
Outcome
number of tillers per meter row lengthe0
Direction
maximume0
Value
18.0 in 2009 and 14.0 in 2010e0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Sorghum
Sorghum · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)Evelyn Simak · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“maximum plant height (243.2 in 2009 and 263.6 in 2010), number of tillers per meter row length (18.0 in 2009 and 14.0 in 2010), green fodder yield (362.4 q/ha in 2009 and 382.7 q/ha in 2010) and dry matter yield (104.4 q/ha in 2009 and 110.0 q/ha in 2010) were recorded in conventional tillage during both the years.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 596–912
t0

“SORGHUM GROWTH, PRODUCTIVITY, QUALITY AND ECONOMICS INFLUENCED BY TILLAGE METHODS AND INTEGRATED NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–116

Title

SORGHUM GROWTH, PRODUCTIVITY, QUALITY AND ECONOMICS INFLUENCED BY TILLAGE METHODS AND INTEGRATED NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT

D.S. Rana; Bhagat Singh; A. K. Dhaka; et al. 2013

Other claims from this paper (5)

Record rev-758f682e4e2ccec8cfefdc212df166bde58f6fe30cea8d32d80f828fffd31bd1 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

tillage · yield · SorghumResults differ

123 papers: 102 positive, 21 negative or no effect

101 papers in the same direction as this claim · 17 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    Sorghum grain yields declined with each increase in tillage intensity in the second rotation cycle (NT > MT > CT).

    Cropping Frequencies to Sustain Long‐Term Conservation Tillage Systems · 1990

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Flat bed planting produced the lowest grain yields except on unfertilized Entisols.

    Grain Yield Response of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) to Tied Ridges and Planting Methods on Entisols and Vertisols of Alemaya Area, Eastern Ethiopian Highlands · 2003

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    With adequate moisture, zero-tillage depressed yields by up to 40% compared with conventional practice.

    No-tillage as compared to tillage practices in dry-land farming of a semi-arid climate. · 1970 · compared with conventional practice

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Tillage or variety did not significantly influence sorghum grain yield.

    Factoring labour when comparing in situ rainwater harvesting technologies for semi-arid areas of central Tanzania · 2023

    Opposite direction

  5. negative
    Preplanting compaction significantly reduced sorghum yields.

    Response of Grain Sorghum to Seedbed Compaction1 · 1966

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Annualized production cost was 11%–32% greater for forage sorghum dominated no-till systems than T‐S‐O.

    Nutritive value and net return of forage crop rotations in the central Great Plains · 2023 · compared with T‐S‐O

    Opposite direction

  7. no effect
    Sorghum yield was not reduced by tillage delayed 10 days.

    Influence of Weed Growth and Tillage Interval During Fallow on Water Storage, Soil Nitrates, and Yield · 1979

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    Sorghum yield averaged 22% lower under no till than under conventional or reduced tillage.

    Twenty Years of Grain Sorghum and Soybean Yield Response to Tillage and N Fertilization of a Claypan Soil · 2017 · compared with conventional or reduced tillage

    Opposite direction

114 papers more in this group

See all 123 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.