Paper · 2001 · The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

Effects of tillage practices on growth and yield of cassava (Manihot esculenta) and some soil properties in Ajibode, South-western Nigeria

EmilOlorun A. Aiyelari; N. U. Ndaeyo; A. A. Agboola

11
claims
19
verbatim quotes
10
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Summary Maintenance of soil fertility status and optimum crop yield has been a great task in Nigeria. Against this background, studies were conducted in 1994 and 1995 growing seasons at the Teaching and Research Farm, University of Ibadan, Nigeria to evaluate the productivity of cassava and soil properties and dynamics under some tillage practices. Randomized block design with four replications was used and the tillage treatments were Heaping [HP], No-Till + Herbicide [NTH], Ridging [RG] and No-Till-Slash and Burn [NSB]. Results revealed that tillage practices had no significant effect on sprouting percentage in 1994 but in 1995, HP treatment was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than others. Tillage had no marked effect on cassava height in both years while number of leaves only differed significantly (P < 0.05) 8 months after planting with HP treatment being higher than others. Stem girth showed no marked differences among treatments in both years. Similarly, in both years, cassava fresh root yield and yield components were not significantly affected by tillage practices. NSB showed significantly higher soil bulk density at planting in both years than other treatments. Generally, soil chemical properties were not markedly affected by the tillage practices. The highest cost of production was observed under NSB while RG produced the highest returns. The study suggests that successful growing of cassava under reduced tillage practices is practicable in an Alfisol in this agro-ecological zone. Resume

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage practices had no significant effect on cassava sprouting percentage in 1994.

Treatment
tillage practicese1
Outcome
sprouting percentagee1
Direction
no significant effecte1
Qualifier
in 1994e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“tillage practices had no significant effect on sprouting percentage in 1994”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 549–624 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In 1995 the heaping treatment gave significantly higher cassava sprouting percentage (P < 0.05) than the other treatments.

Treatment
HP treatmente1
Outcome
sprouting percentagee1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
in 1995e1
Comparator
otherse1

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“sprouting percentage in 1994 but in 1995, HP treatment was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than others”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 596–698 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage had no marked effect on cassava height in both years.

Treatment
Tillagee1
Outcome
cassava heighte1
Direction
no marked effecte1
Qualifier
in both yearse1

Not reportedComparator

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Tillage had no marked effect on cassava height in both years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 700–760 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Number of cassava leaves differed significantly (P < 0.05) 8 months after planting, with heaping higher than the other treatments.

Treatment
HP treatmente1
Outcome
number of leavese1
Direction
highere1
Qualifier
8 months after plantinge1
Comparator
otherse1

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“number of leaves only differed significantly (P < 0.05) 8 months after planting with HP treatment being higher than others”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 767–889 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cassava stem girth showed no marked differences among tillage treatments in both years.

Treatment
treatmentse1
Outcome
Stem girthe1
Direction
no marked differencese1
Qualifier
in both yearse1

Not reportedComparator

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“Stem girth showed no marked differences among treatments in both years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 891–961 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Cassava fresh root yield and yield components were not significantly affected by tillage practices.

Treatment
tillage practicese1
Outcome
fresh root yield and yield componentse1
Direction
not significantly affectede1

Not reportedComparator

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e1

“cassava fresh root yield and yield components were not significantly affected by tillage practices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 989–1087 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No-till slash and burn had significantly higher soil bulk density at planting than other treatments in both years.

Treatment
NSBe1
Outcome
soil bulk densitye1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
other treatmentse1

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“NSB showed significantly higher soil bulk density at planting in both years than other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1186 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil chemical properties were generally not markedly affected by the tillage practices.

Treatment
tillage practicese1
Outcome
soil chemical propertiese1
Direction
not markedly affectede1

Not reportedComparator

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“soil chemical properties were not markedly affected by the tillage practices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1199–1275 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The highest cost of production occurred under no-till slash and burn.

Treatment
NSBe1
Outcome
cost of productione1
Direction
higheste1

Not reportedComparator

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“The highest cost of production was observed under NSB”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1277–1330 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ridging produced the highest returns.

Treatment
RGe1
Outcome
returnse1
Direction
higheste1

Not reportedComparator

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cassava”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 52–59 · show in text ↑
e1

“RG produced the highest returns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1337–1368 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that successful cassava growing under reduced tillage is practicable in an Alfisol in this agro-ecological zone.

Treatment
reduced tillage practicese1
Outcome
successful growinge1
Qualifier
Alfisole1

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

Manihot esculenta
Manihot esculenta · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e1

“successful growing of cassava under reduced tillage practices is practicable in an Alfisol”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1394–1484 · show in text ↑

tillage · growth · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 6 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

tillage · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 9 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

tillage · quality: postharvest · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
See all 2 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.