Abstract
SUMMARY Over a decade after the forest-savanna transition zone of Nigeria was deemed suitable for production of sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor ), no research has been undertaken on the crop's tillage requirements in the southeastern part of the zone. This study evaluated the effects of tillage-mulch practices on soil moisture, water use (WU), grain yield and water use efficiency (WUE) of the crop in a Typic Paleustult (sandy loam) at Nsukka during 2006 and 2007 growing seasons. In a split-plot design, no-till (NT) and conventional tillage (CT) treatments were left bare (B) or covered with mulch (M) at 5 Mg ha −1 . The ensuing treatments (NTB, NTM, CTB, and CTM) represented four tillage methods, which were replicated four times in a randomized complete block. In the monitored root zone, NTB and CTM significantly ( p ≤ 0.05) enhanced the soil moisture status over NTM and CTB, but the main effects of the tillage and the mulch factors were not significant. The crop WU was uninfluenced by the treatments throughout the study. Although the grain yield showed higher values with NT than with CT, the differences were significant ( p ≤ 0.05) only in 2007 that was marked with erratic rainfall and relatively low mean yield. Mulch significantly ( p ≤ 0.05) enhanced the grain yield in 2006, with greater effect in CT than NT. On average, the mulch plots out-yielded their bare counterparts by about 26%. The tillage × mulch interaction was significant ( p ≤ 0.01), and showed higher grain yields in NTB, NTM and CTM than in CTB. In the year-weighted average, yield increments in NTB, NTM and CTM over CTB were 53, 53 and 67% respectively, a pointer to the relevance of mulch with the CT but not the NT. Relative WU showed that the crop's water demand was met under all treatments. Hence, the yield reduction in the CTB was not due to water shortage. The WUE varied among the treatments in the same pattern as grain yield. In summary, NTB and CTM proved superior to NTM only in soil moisture status but to CTB in all measured parameters. From a socio-economic viewpoint, however, NTB would be preferable to CTM for growing sorghum in this area.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
NTB and CTM increased root-zone soil moisture over NTM and CTB.
SorghumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NTB and CTM significantly ( p ≤ 0.05) enhanced the soil moisture status over NTM and CTB”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Main effects of tillage and mulch on soil moisture were not significant.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the main effects of the tillage and the mulch factors were not significant”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop water use was uninfluenced by the treatments.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The crop WU was uninfluenced by the treatments throughout the study”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
No-till yielded more grain than conventional tillage, significantly in 2007 only.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain yield showed higher values with NT than with CT, the differences were significant ( p ≤ 0.05) only in 2007”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch increased grain yield in 2006.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mulch significantly ( p ≤ 0.05) enhanced the grain yield in 2006, with greater effect in CT than NT”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulched plots yielded about 26% more than bare plots.
- Treatment
- mulch plotse0
- Outcome
- out-yieldede0
- Direction
- out-yieldede0
- Value
- about 26%e0
- Comparator
- bare counterpartse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the mulch plots out-yielded their bare counterparts by about 26%”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
NTB had a 53% yield increment over CTB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield increments in NTB, NTM and CTM over CTB were 53, 53 and 67% respectively”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
NTM had a 53% yield increment over CTB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield increments in NTB, NTM and CTM over CTB were 53, 53 and 67% respectively”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
CTM had a 67% yield increment over CTB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield increments in NTB, NTM and CTM over CTB were 53, 53 and 67% respectively”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage-by-mulch interaction affected grain yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The tillage × mulch interaction was significant ( p ≤ 0.01), and showed higher grain yields in NTB, NTM and CTM than in CTB”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Relative water use indicated crop water demand was met under all treatments.
- Outcome
- crop's water demand was met under all treatmentse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Relative WU showed that the crop's water demand was met under all treatments”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Water use efficiency followed the same treatment pattern as grain yield.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The WUE varied among the treatments in the same pattern as grain yield”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
NTB and CTM were superior to NTM for soil moisture status.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NTB and CTM proved superior to NTM only in soil moisture status”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
NTB and CTM were superior to CTB for all measured parameters.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NTB and CTM proved superior to NTM only in soil moisture status but to CTB in all measured parameters”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
NTB is preferable to CTM for sorghum production in this area.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NTB would be preferable to CTM for growing sorghum in this area”
t0“SORGHUM”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · yield · SorghumResults differ
31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 papers →tillage · yield · SorghumResults differ
101 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
119 papers more in this group
See all 123 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.