Paper · 1994 · Journal of Sustainable Agriculture

Agronomic Sustainability of Different Farming Systems on Alfisols in Southwestern Nigeria

Rattan Lal

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
11
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A longterm experiment was conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria, to assess agricultural productivity and sustainability of different farming systems. The experiment, conducted for a 10 year period from 1979 to 1988, was implemented in two phases. The effects of methods of land clearing on crop growth-yield were evaluated during Phase I from 1979 to 1982. Effects of different farming systems on agronomic productivity were evaluated in Phase II from 1983 to 1988. Six land clearing-cum-tillage treatments evaluated in Phase I were: (i) manual clearing with no-till, (ii) manual clearing with plow-till, (iii) shearblade clearing with no-till, (iv) treepusher/rootrake clearing with no-till, (v) treepusher/rootrake clearing with plow-till, and (vi) traditional farming. Similarly, six farming systems evaluated in Phase II were: (i) alley cropping with Leucaena leucocephala, (ii) Mucuna fallowing on severely degraded soils (iii) Mucuna fallowing on moderately degraded soil, (iv) ley farming on severely degraded soil, (v) ley farming on moderately degraded soil, and (vi) natural fallow control. In Phase I, yields of maize (Zea mays), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and cassava (Manihoc esculenta) were higher on manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-till treatments than on other treatments. In Phase II, maize growth was higher on plots with Mucuna fallowing than in alley cropping or ley farming treatments. In contrast, cowpea growth was higher on alley cropped plots. Regardless of the farming system, maize grain yield declined with the cultivation duration. The relative decline in cowpea grain yield with cultivation duration was less than that of maize.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Maize yield was higher on manually cleared no-till and shearblade cleared no-till plots than on other treatments.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse1
Treatment
manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-tille1
Outcome
yieldse1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
other treatmentse1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66 · show in text ↑
e1

“In Phase I, yields of maize (Zea mays), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and cassava (Manihoc esculenta) were higher on manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-till treatments than on other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1104–1319 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cowpea yield was higher on manually cleared no-till and shearblade cleared no-till plots than on other treatments.

Treatment
manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-tille1
Outcome
yieldse1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
other treatmentse1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66 · show in text ↑
e1

“In Phase I, yields of maize (Zea mays), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and cassava (Manihoc esculenta) were higher on manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-till treatments than on other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1104–1319 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cassava yield was higher on manually cleared no-till and shearblade cleared no-till plots than on other treatments.

Treatment
manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-tille1
Outcome
yieldse1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
other treatmentse1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66 · show in text ↑
e1

“In Phase I, yields of maize (Zea mays), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and cassava (Manihoc esculenta) were higher on manually cleared with no-till and shearblade cleared with no-till treatments than on other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1104–1319 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Phase II, maize growth was higher with Mucuna fallowing than with alley cropping or ley farming.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse1
Treatment
Mucuna fallowinge1
Outcome
maize growthe1
Direction
highere1
Comparator
alley cropping or ley farming treatmentse1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66 · show in text ↑
e1

“In Phase II, maize growth was higher on plots with Mucuna fallowing than in alley cropping or ley farming treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1321–1437 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In Phase II, cowpea growth was higher on alley cropped plots.

Treatment
alley cropped plotse1
Outcome
cowpea growthe1
Direction
highere1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66 · show in text ↑
e1

“In contrast, cowpea growth was higher on alley cropped plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1439–1499 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Maize grain yield declined with cultivation duration, regardless of the farming system.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse1
Treatment
cultivation duratione1
Outcome
maize grain yielde1
Direction
declinede1
Qualifier
Regardless of the farming systeme1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66 · show in text ↑
e1

“Regardless of the farming system, maize grain yield declined with the cultivation duration”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1501–1591 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The relative decline in cowpea grain yield with cultivation duration was less than that of maize.

Treatment
cultivation duratione1
Outcome
relative decline in cowpea grain yielde1
Direction
lesse1
Comparator
maizee1
Setting
Ibadan, Nigeriae0

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“conducted on Alfisols at Ibadan, Nigeria”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 26–66 · show in text ↑
e1

“The relative decline in cowpea grain yield with cultivation duration was less than that of maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1593–1689 · show in text ↑

Mucuna · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

tillage · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

35 papers: 27 positive, 8 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

31 papers more in this group

See all 35 papers →

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

14 papers: 9 positive, 5 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

rotation · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

47 papers: 35 positive, 12 negative or no effect

34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 papers →

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

1,095 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 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.