Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage maize had smaller technological costs than the classic system.
Zea maysNot reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The economic efficiency of the no tillage technolog y in maize crop consists of the achievement of yields similar to those achieved und er the classic system, but with smaller technological costs”
Title
TILLAGE SYSTEM’S INFLUENCE UPON ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY ON THE MAIZE YIELD
D. Popa Bulletin of University of Agricultural Sciences and Veterinary Medicine Cluj-Napoca Agriculture 1970. doi:10.15835/buasvmcn-agr:1404
Other claims from this paper (8)
- Intervention effect No-tillage reduced the energetic input of maize by 15.52% compared with the plough with a mould board.
- Intervention effect Fuel intake under the mo tillage variant was 80,70 l/ha, lower than 111,10 l/ha under the classic system.
- Intervention effect Fuel intake per tonne of yield was 12,0 l/t under no tillage, lower than 14,7 l/t under the classic system.
- Observation The energy intake for maize under the classic technology was 22,957 Mj/ha.
- Intervention effect Energetic efficiency of the V4 tillage variant (8.15) was bigger than that of the control variant (8.12).
- Intervention effect Energetic efficiency of the V5 tillage variant (8.46) was bigger than that of the control variant (8.12).
- Intervention effect Energetic efficiency of the V6 no-tillage variant (8.79) was bigger than that of the control variant (8.12).
- Intervention effect No-tillage maize achieved yields similar to those under the classic system.