Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Conventional tillage significantly increased sweet corn green cob and green fodder yields.

A claim from Tillage and Seaweed Extract Effects on Soil Physio-chemical Properties, Microbial Population and Yield of Sweet Corn (Zea mays saccharata L.) in Hills of Nagaland · 2024

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage significantly increased sweet corn green cob and green fodder yields.

Taxon
Sweet Cornt0
Treatment
conventional tillagee0
Outcome
green cob yield, green fodder yielde0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“yield parameters such as green cob yield, green fodder yield showed significant increase under conventional tillage and application of 10% S-SWE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 648–792
t0

“Sweet Corn (Zea mays saccharata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 106–141

Title

Tillage and Seaweed Extract Effects on Soil Physio-chemical Properties, Microbial Population and Yield of Sweet Corn (Zea mays saccharata L.) in Hills of Nagaland

Shivani Kumari; Lanunola Tzudir; T. Gohain; et al. Agricultural Science Digest - A Research Journal 2024. doi:10.18805/ag.d-5962

Other claims from this paper (3)

Record rev-e1d9db9906d888bc9a245d8b186e66a23b24f501c0723979a2cb385622bba968 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

811 papers in the same direction as this claim · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
    Zero tillage produced statistically comparable crop yield for both crops.

    Impact of different tillage methods on growth, development and productivity of maize (Zea mays)-wheat (Tritcum aestivum) cropping system · 2016 · compared with other tillage treatments

    No difference from an alternativeCited by this paper

  2. positive
    Maize grain and stover yields ranked CT, RT, then ZT.

    Influence of Tillage Practices on Soil Physical Properties and Growth and Yield of Maize in Jabal al Akhdar, Libya · 2017 · compared with RT and ZT

    Same directionCited by this paper

  3. no effect
    Cover-crop no-tillage and standard no-tillage gave similar corn yields.

    Potential Long‐Term Benefits of No‐Tillage and Organic Cropping Systems for Grain Production and Soil Improvement · 2007 · compared with NT

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    No-till produced less corn grain than plow tillage.

    Tillage and Rotation Interactions for Corn and Soybean Grain Yield as Affected by Precipitation and Air Temperature · 2004 · compared with plow

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Tillage had no grain-yield effect in manure or compost plots in three of four years.

    Composted and Noncomposted Manure Application to Conventional and No‐Tillage Systems: Corn Yield and Nitrogen Uptake · 1999

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    No-tillage corn grain yield was 5% lower than under conventional tillage.

    Corn and Soybean Response to Rotation Sequence, Row Spacing, and Tillage System · 2003 · compared with conventional tillage system

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Continuous no-till corn on Chalmers soil was 2% wetter at harvest than plowed corn.

    Long‐Term Tillage and Rotation Effects on Corn Growth and Yield on High and Low Organic Matter, Poorly Drained Soils · 1988 · compared with plowing

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    No-tillage without red clover reduced corn grain yield by 13% versus conventional tillage over three years.

    Red Clover and Tillage Influence on Soil Temperature, Water Content, and Corn Emergence · 1999 · compared with conventional tillage treatment

    Opposite direction

1,090 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 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.