Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Conventional tillage gave significantly higher grain and straw yield of finger millet (3.04 and 4.69 t/ha) than minimum tillage.

A claim from Weed dynamics in conservation agricultural systems as influenced by conservation tillage and nutrient management practices under rainfed finger millet · 2018

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage gave significantly higher grain and straw yield of finger millet (3.04 and 4.69 t/ha) than minimum tillage.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanae0
Treatment
Conventional tillagee1
Outcome
grain and straw yielde1
Direction
highere1
Value
3.04 and 4.69 t/hae1
Qualifier
2.60 and 4.03 t/hae2
Comparator
minimum tillagee2
Setting
field experimente0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor role

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a field experiment was conducted under rainfed finger millet (Eleusine coracana (L.) Gaertn.) on Alfisols for two consecutive seasons during 2014 and 2015 at All India Coordinated Research Project on Dryland Agriculture, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru, India”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 454–734
e1

“Conventional tillage has recorded significantly higher grain and straw yield of finger millet (3.04 and 4.69 t/ha, respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 854–982
e2

“as compared to minimum tillage (2.60 and 4.03 t/ha, respectively)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1464–1529

Title

Weed dynamics in conservation agricultural systems as influenced by conservation tillage and nutrient management practices under rainfed finger millet

Veeresh Hatti; B.K. Ramachandrappa; Mudalagiriyappa Indian Journal of Weed Science 2018. doi:10.5958/0974-8164.2018.00076.x

Other claims from this paper (10)

Record rev-bdc97db334ecf4e905d069e9bbee10bf7e444bf285726e7e4447ae31b0535a36 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

tillage · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Results agree

12 papers: 12 positive, 0 negative or no effect

11 papers in the same direction as this claim

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.