Claim · model-written summary
CA maize–legume intercrop increased infiltration relative to conventional treatment at both sites.
- Treatment
- CA maize–legume intercrope0
- Outcome
- water infiltratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- conventional treatmente0
Zea maysNot reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In both study locations CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop gave higher water infiltration than the conventional treatment”
Title
Amos Robert Ngwira; Christian Thierfelder; Dayton M. Lambert Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems 2012. doi:10.1017/s1742170512000257
Other claims from this paper (10)
- Intervention effect In Lemu, CA monocrop maize yielded 2.7 Mg ha −1 more than conventional tillage in 2009/10.
- Intervention effect In Lemu, CA maize–legume intercrop yielded 2.3 Mg ha −1 more than conventional tillage in 2009/10.
- Intervention effect Zidyana had substantial maize yield benefits in the fifth season.
- Intervention effect CA maize production used at most 50 days per hectare versus 62 with conventional tillage.
- Intervention effect CA maize cost US$140 compared with US$176 under conventional tillage.
- Intervention effect Zidyana CA monocrop maize produced 33% higher gross margins than conventional tillage.
- Intervention effect Zidyana CA maize–legume intercrop produced 23% higher gross margins than conventional tillage.
- Intervention effect Zidyana CA monocrop maize had the highest earthworm population at 48 per square metre.
- Observation Zidyana CA maize–legume intercropping had 40 earthworms.
- Intervention effect CA monocrop maize increased infiltration relative to conventional treatment at both sites.