Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Rainy season 2014 conservation agriculture yield was 4.3 ton/ha, 68% above farmer practice.

A claim from Participatory Approach for Conservation Agriculture Technology to Increase Maize Production on Dryland and Semiarid for Adaptation on Climate Change in NTB · 2019

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rainy season 2014 conservation agriculture yield was 4.3 ton/ha, 68% above farmer practice.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
CA techniquese0
Outcome
yield of maizee0
Direction
increasee0
Value
4.3 ton/hae0
Qualifier
68%e0
Comparator
farmer practicee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSetting

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

“The average yield of maize in the rainy season of 2014 with CA techniques was 4.3 ton/ha; this yield was increase by 68% compared to farmer practice (2.6 ton/ha).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1222–1384

Title

Participatory Approach for Conservation Agriculture Technology to Increase Maize Production on Dryland and Semiarid for Adaptation on Climate Change in NTB

Suriadi, Ahmad; Mulyani, Anny; Ujang Suparman Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) 2019. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3271206

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-e2716f647d7d2d2f4b32910b213d4e7e2bae6ee8749f9d2569c274944ff5eeb5 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 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
    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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. no effect
    A significant tillage x year interaction indicated equal continuous corn yields for CT and NT in the first 2 years.

    Corn Production as Affected by Tillage System and Starter Fertilizer · 2002 · compared with NT

    Opposite direction

  8. negative
    Soil compaction markedly reduced corn growth and yield.

    Soil Compaction in the Field and Corn Growth1 · 1962

    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.