Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Cassava yield was higher on manually cleared no-till and shearblade cleared no-till plots than on other treatments.

A claim from Agronomic Sustainability of Different Farming Systems on Alfisols in Southwestern Nigeria · 1994

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cassava yield was higher on manually cleared no-till and shearblade cleared no-till plots than on other treatments.

Treatment
manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-tille1
Outcome
yieldse1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
other treatmentse1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleValueQualifier

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66
e1

“In Phase I, yields of maize (Zea mays), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and cassava (Manihoc esculenta) were higher on manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-till treatments than on other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1104–1319

Title

Agronomic Sustainability of Different Farming Systems on Alfisols in Southwestern Nigeria

Rattan Lal Journal of Sustainable Agriculture 1994. doi:10.1300/j064v04n02_05

Other claims from this paper (6)

Record rev-945ee4cd0959d7063ec0fd2e02972134ef139e3b53715b27ec03c05f430cbead · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

tillage · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 9 positive, 5 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this claim · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 14 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.