Abstract
Hedgerow management is crucial to successful alley cropping. Leucaena [ Leucaena leucocephala (Lam.) de Wit] hedgerow management practices were assessed over four seasons for effect on maize ( Zea mays L.) yield and N recovery in alley cropping. Maize was planted between leucaena hedgerows spaced 4 m apart on a Lithic Eutropepts. Pruning application and regime factors were arranged in 3 × 3 factorial augmented with a control (stone walls) in randomized complete block design with three replicates. Hedgerows were pruned at 0.50 m height at (a) maize planting and at 30 d after planting (DAP), (b) planting and 40 DAP, or (c) planting, 30 and 60 DAP. Prunings were (a) removed from plots, (b) applied as mulch or (c) incorporated into the soil at planting. A hedgerow + fertilizer treatment in an adjacent trial was included for comparison. Soil application of leucaena prunings increased average maize yield and grain N uptake by 157 and 163%, respectively, compared to when prunings were removed. Addition of inorganic fertilizer further increased maize yield and N recovery. Pruning three times per season gave higher maize yield, N uptake and N recovery than pruning twice, but reduced leucaena biomass and N yield. Pruning twice per season, with the second pruning at 40 rather than at 30 DAP, increased biomass N yield but reduced N recovery over the seasons. Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings per season averaged 31% higher maize yield and 48% higher N uptake than control. N recovery was enhanced by soil application of three prunings per crop and by fertilization.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Soil application of leucaena prunings increased maize yield by 157% versus pruning removal.
- Treatment
- Soil application of leucaena pruningse0
- Outcome
- maize yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 157e0
- Comparator
- prunings were removede0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil application of leucaena prunings increased average maize yield and grain N uptake by 157 and 163%, respectively, compared to when prunings were removed”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil application of leucaena prunings increased maize grain N uptake by 163% versus pruning removal.
- Treatment
- Soil application of leucaena pruningse0
- Outcome
- grain N uptakee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 163%e0
- Comparator
- prunings were removede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil application of leucaena prunings increased average maize yield and grain N uptake by 157 and 163%, respectively, compared to when prunings were removed”
Claim · model-written summary
Added inorganic fertilizer further increased maize yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Addition of inorganic fertilizer further increased maize yield and N recovery”
Claim · model-written summary
Added inorganic fertilizer further increased maize N recovery.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Addition of inorganic fertilizer further increased maize yield and N recovery”
Claim · model-written summary
Three prunings per season gave higher maize yield than two prunings.
- Treatment
- Pruning three times per seasone0
- Outcome
- maize yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- pruning twicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pruning three times per season gave higher maize yield, N uptake and N recovery than pruning twice”
Claim · model-written summary
Three prunings per season gave higher maize N uptake than two prunings.
- Treatment
- Pruning three times per seasone0
- Outcome
- N uptakee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- pruning twicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pruning three times per season gave higher maize yield, N uptake and N recovery than pruning twice”
Claim · model-written summary
Three prunings per season gave higher maize N recovery than two prunings.
- Treatment
- Pruning three times per seasone0
- Outcome
- N recoverye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- pruning twicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pruning three times per season gave higher maize yield, N uptake and N recovery than pruning twice”
Claim · model-written summary
Three prunings per season reduced leucaena biomass and N yield relative to two prunings.
- Treatment
- Pruning three times per seasone0
- Outcome
- leucaena biomass and N yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- pruning twicee0
LeucaenaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pruning three times per season gave higher maize yield, N uptake and N recovery than pruning twice, but reduced leucaena biomass and N yield”
Claim · model-written summary
With two prunings, a second pruning at 40 rather than 30 DAP increased biomass N yield.
- Treatment
- the second pruning at 40e0
- Outcome
- biomass N yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- at 30 DAPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pruning twice per season, with the second pruning at 40 rather than at 30 DAP, increased biomass N yield but reduced N recovery over the seasons”
e1“Soil application of leucaena prunings”
Claim · model-written summary
With two prunings, a second pruning at 40 rather than 30 DAP reduced maize N recovery.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pruning twice per season, with the second pruning at 40 rather than at 30 DAP, increased biomass N yield but reduced N recovery over the seasons”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings gave 31% higher maize yield than control.
- Treatment
- Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings per seasone0
- Outcome
- maize yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 31%e0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings per season averaged 31% higher maize yield and 48% higher N uptake than control”
Claim · model-written summary
Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings gave 48% higher maize N uptake than control.
- Treatment
- Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings per seasone0
- Outcome
- N uptakee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 48%e0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Alley cropping with soil application of three prunings per season averaged 31% higher maize yield and 48% higher N uptake than control”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil application of three prunings per crop enhanced N recovery.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“N recovery was enhanced by soil application of three prunings per crop and by fertilization”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilization enhanced N recovery.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“N recovery was enhanced by soil application of three prunings per crop and by fertilization”
t0“Maize”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · yield · LeucaenaPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →climate site · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →pruning · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →application · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
150 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
157 papers more in this group
See all 161 papers →pruning · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
85 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
170 papers more in this group
See all 174 papers →climate site · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
101 papers in the same direction as this paper · 73 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
176 papers more in this group
See all 180 papers →application · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
574 papers in the same direction as this paper · 42 in the opposite direction · 12 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
625 papers more in this group
See all 629 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3,484 papers in the same direction as this paper · 338 in the opposite direction · 85 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 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.