Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Rainy season maize grain yield under NT-RF was 12.66% lower than CT-RF.

A claim from Effect of tillage and crop-establishment techniques on productivity, profitability and soil health under maize (Zea mays)maizefield pea (Pisum sativum) cropping system · 2001

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rainy season maize grain yield under NT-RF was 12.66% lower than CT-RF.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
NT-RFe0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
lesse0
Value
12.66%e0
Comparator
CT-RFe0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Rainy season (kharif) maize grown under NT-RF recorded 12.66% less grain yield than the CT-RF”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–870

Title

Effect of tillage and crop-establishment techniques on productivity, profitability and soil health under maize (Zea mays)maizefield pea (Pisum sativum) cropping system

GULAB SINGH YADAV; M. DATTA; SUBHASH BABU; et al. Indian Journal of Agronomy 2001. doi:10.59797/ija.v60i3.4485

Other claims from this paper (10)

Record rev-84ad0ebc8ca533b6f55b125c710d14b78856639a95b9c8d07f32bc7be6b7f0ac · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,016 papers: 791 positive, 225 negative or no effect

225 papers in the same direction as this claim · 790 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
    Irrigation increased mean maize yields by 36% compared with rain-fed maize in the western Great Plains.

    Evaluation of a Process-Based Agro-Ecosystem Model (Agro-IBIS) across the U.S. Corn Belt: Simulations of the Interannual Variability in Maize Yield · 2003 · compared with rain-fed maize

    Opposite direction

  2. positive
    Corn grain yield increased with irrigation from no postplant irrigation to full crop water use in 1992.

    Yield and Water Use Efficiency of Corn in Response to LEPA Irrigation · 1995 · compared with no-post plant irrigations

    Opposite direction

  3. positive
    SDD irrigation increased economic profits by +11.2% versus MAD.

    Sustainable irrigation based on co-regulation of soil water supply and atmospheric evaporative demand · 2021 · compared with MAD

    Opposite direction

  4. positive
    Irrigation boosted corn yields by 75%–90% over rain-fed corn in Nebraska, Kansas and Texas.

    Trends and Variability in U.S. Corn Yields Over the Twentieth Century · 2005 · compared with rain-fed corn

    Opposite direction

  5. positive
    Maize yields under irrigation were 81% higher than under rainfed conditions.

    Quantifying irrigation cooling benefits to maize yield in the US Midwest · 2020 · compared with rainfed maize

    Opposite direction

  6. positive
    Furrow planting with film-mulched ridges increased maize grain yield by 29% and 28% on average compared with the check.

    Plastic-Film Mulching for Enhanced Water-Use Efficiency and Economic Returns from Maize Fields in Semiarid China · 2017 · compared with check

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    Each additional 60 mm irrigation increased simulated crop yield by 1.2 t ha −1.

    Modeling Wheat and Maize Productivity as Affected by Climate Variation and Irrigation Supply in North China Plain · 2010

    Opposite direction

  8. positive
    Full irrigation in sandy loam gave the highest maize yield.

    Effects of Soils and Irrigation Volume on Maize Yield, Irrigation Water Productivity, and Nitrogen Uptake · 2019

    Opposite direction

1,007 papers more in this group

See all 1,016 papers →

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

287 papers in the same direction as this claim · 811 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
    No-tillage was associated with higher corn yields.

    Influence of No‐tillage on Soil Moisture1 · 1971

    Opposite direction

  2. positive
    CA improved maize grain yield, especially in two- or three-year rotations.

    ROTATION IN CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE SYSTEMS OF ZAMBIA: EFFECTS ON SOIL QUALITY AND WATER RELATIONS · 2010

    Opposite direction

  3. positive
    Subsoil tillage increased grain yield of spring maize by 12.8% on average compared with conventional soil treatment.

    Effect of subsoil tillage depth on nutrient accumulation, root distribution, and grain yield in spring maize · 2014 · compared with conventional soil treatment

    Opposite direction

  4. positive
    In 1983 strip or no tillage with soybean rotation raised corn grain yield by 12%.

    Influence of Tillage and Crop Rotation on Yields of Corn, Soybean, and Wheat · 1988

    Opposite direction

  5. positive
    In Lemu, CA monocrop maize yielded 2.7 Mg ha −1 more than conventional tillage in 2009/10.

    Conservation agriculture systems for Malawian smallholder farmers: long-term effects on crop productivity, profitability and soil quality · 2012 · compared with conventional tillage

    Opposite direction

  6. positive
    Tillage increased corn yields.

    Long-term crop rotation and tillage effects on soil greenhouse gas emissions and crop production in Illinois, USA · 2018 · compared with no-tillage

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    No-till gave a higher mean corn grain yield, 2.97 Mg ha −1, than moldboard plow-disk.

    Tillage Effects on Corn Production and Soil Physical Conditions · 1995 · compared with MP

    Opposite direction

  8. positive
    Four-year mean corn grain yield showed a 1000 kg/ha advantage for till planting on sandy loam in northern Indiana.

    Effect of Eight Tillage‐Planting Systems on Soil Temperature, Percent Stand, Plant Growth, and Yield of Corn on Five Indiana Soils1 · 1973

    Opposite direction

1,090 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 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.