Claim · model-written summary
The TR and CT soil-water conservation practices gave better maize yields than the ML and IP practices in the same year.
- Treatment
- TR and CTe1
- Outcome
- yieldse1
- Direction
- bettere1
- Comparator
- ML and IPe1
- Setting
- Teaching and Research Farms, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ifee0
Zea maysNot reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e0“Field experiments were conducted at the Teaching and Research Farms, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife”
e1“The TR and CT gave better yields compared with the ML and IP of the same year”
Title
D A Okunade; K O Adekalu; J W Gowing IOP Conference Series Earth and Environmental Science 2020. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/445/1/012027
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Intervention effect The 50 and 25% replenishment levels under TR and CT gave better maize yield and WUE than other replenishment levels.
- Intervention effect Biomass yield in the 2008-2010 planting seasons was higher in TR, IP and CT than in the control experiment.
- Observation Moisture retention ability was better in TR than in the other practices in the same year.
- Observation Moisture retention ability was slightly lower in CT than in TR in the same year.
- Intervention effect In 2011 the 50% soil moisture replenishment gave the highest maize yield in TR, followed by CT and ML.
- Observation TR gave the best water use efficiency at the 50% replenishment level.
- Observation The control practice CP gave a comparatively low water use efficiency.
- Recommendation Soil moisture conservation practice is an effective way to increase water availability for higher maize yields.
- Recommendation A combination of the supplementary in-situ RWH system could produce better results in enhanced maize yield.