Abstract
Phosphorus deficiency is a major constraint that limits food production in Nigeria, especially under acidic soil conditions. Presently, successful production of high nutrient requiring plants such as maize is only possible with the use of inorganic phosphate fertilizers that are very costly and often unavailable to the farmer. In an attempt to address this problem, field trials were conducted on a Kanhaplic Haplustalf at Samaru (11 o 11'N, 7o 38'E) to evaluate the response of ten (10) leguminous cover crops and maize to native and applied phosphate, and to evaluate the effects of these treatments on the performance and P nutrition of succeeding maize in a rotation. Among the cover crops evaluated, Crotalaria ochroleuca was the most P efficient in terms of total amount of above ground biomass per unit P taken up, while Phaseolus vulgaris was the least efficient. The yield of maize preceded by Lablab purpureus, Chamaecrista rotundifolia, and Mucuna pruriens was increased by over 50% in the first year after cover cropping. The positive effects of these cover crops on yield of succeeding maize did not however manifest in the second year. Effect of Sokoto Phosphate Rock (SPR) on maize yields and available soil P started manifesting only in the third year of cropping when the soil P was sufficiently depleted to force the dissolution of phosphate rock. Nigerian Journal of Soil Science Vol.4 2003: 25-34
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
Claim · model-written summary
Crotalaria ochroleuca was the most phosphorus-efficient cover crop by biomass per phosphorus uptake.
- Taxon
- Crotalaria ochroleuca
Crotalaria ochroleucae0 - Outcome
- total amount of above ground biomass per unit P taken upe0
- Direction
- most P efficiente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Among the cover crops evaluated, Crotalaria ochroleuca was the most P efficient in terms of total amount of above ground biomass per unit P taken up, while Phaseolus vulgaris was the least efficient.”
Claim · model-written summary
Phaseolus vulgaris was the least phosphorus-efficient cover crop.
- Taxon
- Phaseolus vulgaris
Phaseolus vulgarise0 - Outcome
- total amount of above ground biomass per unit P taken upe0
- Direction
- least efficiente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Among the cover crops evaluated, Crotalaria ochroleuca was the most P efficient in terms of total amount of above ground biomass per unit P taken up, while Phaseolus vulgaris was the least efficient.”
Claim · model-written summary
Lablab purpureus preceding maize increased yield by over 50% in the first year.
- Treatment
- preceded by Lablab purpureuse0
- Outcome
- yield of maizee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- over 50%e0
- Qualifier
- first year after cover croppinge0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of maize preceded by Lablab purpureus, Chamaecrista rotundifolia, and Mucuna pruriens was increased by over 50% in the first year after cover cropping.”
Claim · model-written summary
Chamaecrista rotundifolia preceding maize increased yield by over 50% in the first year.
- Treatment
- Chamaecrista rotundifoliae0
- Outcome
- yield of maizee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- over 50%e0
- Qualifier
- first year after cover croppinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of maize preceded by Lablab purpureus, Chamaecrista rotundifolia, and Mucuna pruriens was increased by over 50% in the first year after cover cropping.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mucuna pruriens preceding maize increased yield by over 50% in the first year.
- Treatment
- Mucuna pruriense0
- Outcome
- yield of maizee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- over 50%e0
- Qualifier
- first year after cover croppinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of maize preceded by Lablab purpureus, Chamaecrista rotundifolia, and Mucuna pruriens was increased by over 50% in the first year after cover cropping.”
Claim · model-written summary
The Lablab yield benefit did not manifest in the second year.
- Treatment
- Lablab purpureuse1
- Outcome
- yield of succeeding maizee0
- Direction
- did not however manifeste0
- Qualifier
- second yeare0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The positive effects of these cover crops on yield of succeeding maize did not however manifest in the second year.”
e1“maize preceded by Lablab purpureus, Chamaecrista rotundifolia, and Mucuna pruriens”
Claim · model-written summary
The Chamaecrista yield benefit did not manifest in the second year.
- Treatment
- Chamaecrista rotundifoliae1
- Outcome
- yield of succeeding maizee0
- Direction
- did not however manifeste0
- Qualifier
- second yeare0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The positive effects of these cover crops on yield of succeeding maize did not however manifest in the second year.”
e1“maize preceded by Lablab purpureus, Chamaecrista rotundifolia, and Mucuna pruriens”
Claim · model-written summary
The Mucuna yield benefit did not manifest in the second year.
- Treatment
- Mucuna pruriense1
- Outcome
- yield of succeeding maizee0
- Direction
- did not however manifeste0
- Qualifier
- second yeare0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The positive effects of these cover crops on yield of succeeding maize did not however manifest in the second year.”
e1“maize preceded by Lablab purpureus, Chamaecrista rotundifolia, and Mucuna pruriens”
Claim · model-written summary
Sokoto Phosphate Rock effects on maize yield became evident only in year three.
- Treatment
- Sokoto Phosphate Rock (SPR)e0
- Outcome
- maize yieldse0
- Qualifier
- only in the third year of croppinge0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effect of Sokoto Phosphate Rock (SPR) on maize yields and available soil P started manifesting only in the third year of cropping when the soil P was sufficiently depleted to force the dissolution of phosphate rock.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sokoto Phosphate Rock effects on available soil phosphorus became evident only in year three.
- Treatment
- Sokoto Phosphate Rock (SPR)e0
- Outcome
- available soil Pe0
- Qualifier
- only in the third year of croppinge0
Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“Effect of Sokoto Phosphate Rock (SPR) on maize yields and available soil P started manifesting only in the third year of cropping when the soil P was sufficiently depleted to force the dissolution of phosphate rock.”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil phosphorus depletion forced phosphate rock dissolution in the third year.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“when the soil P was sufficiently depleted to force the dissolution of phosphate rock.”
The same questions in other papers
Lablab purpureus · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
Chamaecrista rotundifolia · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Mucuna pruriens · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.