Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Minimum tillage had no significant influence on soil organic carbon in the meta-analysis.

A claim from The effect of minimum tillage and animal manure on maize yields and soil organic carbon in sub‐Saharan Africa: A meta‐analysis · 2021

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum tillage had no significant influence on soil organic carbon in the meta-analysis.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
Minimum tillagee0
Outcome
soil organic carbone0
Direction
no significant influencee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Minimum tillage had no significant influence on maize yields and soil organic carbon.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 991–1076

Title

The effect of minimum tillage and animal manure on maize yields and soil organic carbon in sub‐Saharan Africa: A meta‐analysis

M.W. Githongo; M.N. Kiboi; F.K. Ngetich; et al. Environmental Challenges 2021. doi:10.1016/j.envc.2021.100340

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-cdc8a2dcdc09ba749717131bb6cf68422d09743942d274451e8a7e71c564e3af · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer

tillage · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

82 papers: 68 positive, 14 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this claim · 68 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
    No-tillage, residue retention and crop rotation/intercropping maintained higher soil organic carbon and total soil N than conventional tillage after four years.

    Conservation Agriculture Improves Soil Quality, Crop Yield, and Incomes of Smallholder Farmers in North Western Ghana · 2017 · compared with conventional tillage practices

    Opposite direction

  2. positive
    Rotary-till and no-till increased soil organic carbon, total nitrogen and C:N of surface soil layers in maize fields.

    Short-term effects of tillage and residue on spring maize yield through regulating root-shoot ratio in Northeast China · 2017

    Opposite direction

  3. positive
    Soil organic matter and available N and P were ordered ST ≈ NT > CT.

    Influence of conservation tillage practices on soil properties and crop yields for maize and wheat cultivation in Beijing, China · 2009 · compared with CT

    Opposite direction

  4. positive
    No-tillage with straw increased bulk soil organic carbon content by 10.0% compared with conventional tillage in maize soil.

    Effect of Tillage Treatment on the Diversity of Soil Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungal and Soil Aggregate-Associated Carbon Content · 2018 · compared with conventional mouldboard-ploughing tillage without straw (CT)

    Opposite direction

  5. positive
    NT-FB had the highest SOC stock at 0–30 cm.

    Potential of conservation tillage and altered land configuration to improve soil properties, carbon sequestration and productivity of maize based cropping system in eastern Himalayas, India · 2021

    Opposite direction

  6. positive
    Long-term no-till ameliorated medium stover removal effects by maintaining near-surface soil organic C levels.

    Tillage and Residue Management Effects on Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Under Irrigated Continuous Corn · 2014 · compared with medium stover removal

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    Soil organic carbon content was higher under no-till (18·6 g kg−1) than under plow-till (12·2 g kg−1).

    Soil quality changes under continuous cropping for seventeen seasons of an alfisol in western Nigeria · 1998 · compared with plow-till

    Opposite direction

  8. positive
    Conservation agriculture raised soil pH by 14% relative to common practice in year five.

    Medium-term effects of conservation agriculture on soil quality · 2017 · compared with common practice

    Opposite direction

73 papers more in this group

See all 82 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.