Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage benefit cost ratio was 0.86.
- Taxon
- cowpea
Vigna unguiculatat0 - Treatment
- CTe0
- Outcome
- B: Ce1
- Value
- 0.86e0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingDirectionQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CT (0.86)”
t0“cowpea”
e1“Higher benefit cost (B: C) ratio was recorded in ZT (2.02) followed by RT (1.07) and CT (0.86).”
Title
T.D. Lama; R. B. R. Yadava; Anant Bahadur; et al. Vegetable Science 2014
Other claims from this paper (15)
- Observation Reduced tillage energy input was 16399 MJ/ha.
- Observation Zero tillage energy input was 14535 MJ/ha.
- Intervention effect Bed planting increased energy output by 19% over flat planting.
- Intervention effect Residue incorporation increased energy output by 10% over removal.
- Intervention effect Energy use efficiency was highest with zero tillage at 6.54.
- Intervention effect Energy use efficiency was lowest with conventional tillage at 4.39.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage had the highest energy productivity of 1.33 kg/MJ.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage lowered cultivation cost by 34% relative to conventional tillage.
- Intervention effect Reduced tillage lowered cultivation cost by 8% relative to conventional tillage.
- Intervention effect Bed planting cost INR 26639/ha, higher than flat planting.
- Intervention effect Zero tillage had the highest benefit cost ratio, 2.02.
- Observation Reduced tillage benefit cost ratio was 1.07.
- Intervention effect Bed planting increased benefit cost ratio to 1.42 versus flat planting.
- Intervention effect Residue incorporation increased benefit cost ratio to 1.40 versus removal.
- Recommendation The authors recommend zero tillage, bed planting and residue management for energy efficiency and profitability.