Abstract
Degradation of soil physical quality, following deforestation and cultivation, is a major soil-related constraint to an intensive use of soil for crop production in subhumid regions of subSaharan Africa. Use of crop residue mulch is an important strategy to minimize the risks of soil degradation. Therefore, a three-year experiment was conducted to study the effects of five rates of mulch application (0, 2, 4, 6 and 8 Mg ha−1 season−1) on soil physical properties and growth and yield of maize (Zea mays). Mulch rate of rice straw significantly increased maize grain and stover yields during the first season, and the stover yield during the second season. In comparison with the control, the grain yield increased by 20 per cent at 2 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate and by 33 per cent at 8 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate. The rate of increase was 0·16 Mg ha−1 for grain yield and 0·38 Mg ha−1 for stover yield for every Mg of mulch applied. The increase in stover yield during the second season was 67 per cent for 8 Mg ha−1 mulch rate compared with the unmulched control. Effects of mulch rate on soil physical properties were confined mostly to the surface 0–5 cm depth. For this depth, mulching decreased bulk density from 1·17 Mg m−3 for control to 0·98 Mg m−3, and penetration resistance from 1·54 kg cm−2 to 1·07 kg cm−2 for 8 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate. Application of mulch up to 16 Mg ha−1 yr−1 for three consecutive years had no effect on soil physical properties below 5 cm depth. Experiments were probably not conducted for a long enough period. For mulch farming to be adopted by farmers of West Africa, it must be an integral part of the improved farming system. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Rice straw mulch significantly increased first-season maize grain yield.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mulch rate of rice straw significantly increased maize grain and stover yields during the first season”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rice straw mulch significantly increased first-season maize stover yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mulch rate of rice straw significantly increased maize grain and stover yields during the first season”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rice straw mulch significantly increased second-season stover yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the stover yield during the second season”
e1“Mulch rate of rice straw significantly increased maize grain and stover yields during the first season, and the stover yield during the second season”
e2“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
At 2 Mg ha−1 mulch, grain yield increased 20 per cent versus control.
- Treatment
- 2 Mg ha−1 of mulch ratee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 20 per cente0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In comparison with the control, the grain yield increased by 20 per cent at 2 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate and by 33 per cent at 8 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
At 8 Mg ha−1 mulch, grain yield increased 33 per cent versus control.
- Treatment
- 8 Mg ha−1 of mulch ratee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 33 per cente0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In comparison with the control, the grain yield increased by 20 per cent at 2 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate and by 33 per cent at 8 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield rose 0·16 Mg ha−1 per Mg of mulch applied.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The rate of increase was 0·16 Mg ha−1 for grain yield and 0·38 Mg ha−1 for stover yield for every Mg of mulch applied”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Stover yield rose 0·38 Mg ha−1 per Mg of mulch applied.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The rate of increase was 0·16 Mg ha−1 for grain yield and 0·38 Mg ha−1 for stover yield for every Mg of mulch applied”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-season stover yield rose 67 per cent at 8 Mg ha−1 mulch compared with unmulched control.
- Treatment
- 8 Mg ha−1 mulch ratee0
- Outcome
- stover yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 67 per cente0
- Comparator
- unmulched controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The increase in stover yield during the second season was 67 per cent for 8 Mg ha−1 mulch rate compared with the unmulched control”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch effects on soil physical properties were mainly at 0–5 cm depth.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Effects of mulch rate on soil physical properties were confined mostly to the surface 0–5 cm depth”
Claim · model-written summary
At 0–5 cm, mulch lowered soil bulk density from 1·17 to 0·98 Mg m−3.
- Treatment
- mulchinge0
- Outcome
- bulk densitye0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 0·98 Mg m−3e0
- Qualifier
- surface 0–5 cm depthe2
- Comparator
- controle0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“mulching decreased bulk density from 1·17 Mg m−3 for control to 0·98 Mg m−3”
e1“For this depth, mulching decreased bulk density”
e2“surface 0–5 cm depth”
Claim · model-written summary
At 0–5 cm, mulch lowered soil penetration resistance from 1·54 to 1·07 kg cm−2.
- Treatment
- 8 Mg ha−1 of mulch ratee0
- Outcome
- penetration resistancee0
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Value
- 1·07 kg cm−2e0
- Qualifier
- surface 0–5 cm depthe2
- Comparator
- controle1
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“penetration resistance from 1·54 kg cm−2 to 1·07 kg cm−2 for 8 Mg ha−1 of mulch rate”
e1“For this depth, mulching decreased bulk density from 1·17 Mg m−3 for control to 0·98 Mg m−3, and penetration resistance”
e2“surface 0–5 cm depth”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch up to 16 Mg ha−1 yr−1 over three years had no effect on soil properties below 5 cm.
- Treatment
- mulch up to 16 Mg ha−1 yr−1e0
- Outcome
- soil physical properties below 5 cm depthe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Application of mulch up to 16 Mg ha−1 yr−1 for three consecutive years had no effect on soil physical properties below 5 cm depth”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend mulch farming as part of an improved farming system in West Africa.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For mulch farming to be adopted by farmers of West Africa, it must be an integral part of the improved farming system”
e1“maize (Zea mays)”
The same questions in other papers
Oryza sativa · organism · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Oryza sativa · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
62 papers more in this group
See all 66 papers →mulching · disease · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →mulching · organism · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →mulching · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
108 papers more in this group
See all 112 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 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.