Abstract
Two seasons experiments conducted in 2002 and 2003 revealed that Tillage operations significantly influenced leafspot disease severity; Percentage lodging 3.14; 2.08 and Grain yield 3.02; 3.84 in 2002 and 2003 respectively. Plant density also had significant difference on leafspot disease severity; Percentage lodging 4.82, 3.16 and Grain yield 4.00; 4.18 in 2002 and 2003 respectively. Spot tillage recorded low leafspot disease severity 0.94; 1.02 in comparison with Strip tillage 1.18; 1.30 when zero tillage (control) 2.28; 2.77 were high. 53,000 plants/ha recorded high leafspot disease severity 1.84, 1.95 in comparison with 26,666 plants/ha 1.05, 1.14 when 17,777 plants/ha 0.92; 1.00 were low in 2002 and 2003 respectively. Spot tillage recorded significantly highest grain yield 4.35; 4.72 tons/ha followed by strip 3.82; 4.02; when zero tillage 3.20; 3.66 were lowest. 53,000 plants/ha recorded high grain yield 4.51; 4.30 tons/ha in comparison with 26,666 plants/ha 2.48; 1.10 when 17,777 plants/ha 2.02; 1.95 were low in 2002 and 2003 respectively. International Journal of Agriculture and Rural Development Vol. 7(1) 2006: 33-36
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage significantly influenced maize leaf spot severity.
Zea maysNot reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tillage operations significantly influenced leafspot disease severity”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage significantly influenced lodging.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tillage operations significantly influenced leafspot disease severity; Percentage lodging 3.14; 2.08 and Grain yield 3.02; 3.84 in 2002 and 2003 respectively”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage significantly influenced grain yield.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tillage operations significantly influenced leafspot disease severity; Percentage lodging 3.14; 2.08 and Grain yield 3.02; 3.84 in 2002 and 2003 respectively”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant density significantly affected leaf spot severity.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plant density also had significant difference on leafspot disease severity”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant density significantly affected lodging.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plant density also had significant difference on leafspot disease severity; Percentage lodging 4.82, 3.16 and Grain yield 4.00; 4.18 in 2002 and 2003 respectively”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant density significantly affected grain yield.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plant density also had significant difference on leafspot disease severity; Percentage lodging 4.82, 3.16 and Grain yield 4.00; 4.18 in 2002 and 2003 respectively”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Spot tillage had lower leaf spot severity than strip and zero tillage.
- Treatment
- Spot tillagee0
- Outcome
- leafspot disease severitye0
- Direction
- lowe0
- Value
- 0.94; 1.02e0
- Comparator
- Strip tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spot tillage recorded low leafspot disease severity 0.94; 1.02 in comparison with Strip tillage 1.18; 1.30 when zero tillage (control) 2.28; 2.77 were high”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest density had higher leaf spot severity than lower densities.
- Treatment
- 53,000 plants/hae0
- Outcome
- leafspot disease severitye0
- Direction
- highe0
- Value
- 1.84, 1.95e0
- Comparator
- 26,666 plants/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“53,000 plants/ha recorded high leafspot disease severity 1.84, 1.95 in comparison with 26,666 plants/ha 1.05, 1.14 when 17,777 plants/ha 0.92; 1.00 were low in 2002 and 2003 respectively”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Spot tillage produced the highest grain yield.
- Treatment
- Spot tillagee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 4.35; 4.72 tons/hae0
- Comparator
- zero tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spot tillage recorded significantly highest grain yield 4.35; 4.72 tons/ha followed by strip 3.82; 4.02; when zero tillage 3.20; 3.66 were lowest”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest density produced higher grain yield than lower densities.
- Treatment
- 53,000 plants/hae0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highe0
- Value
- 4.51; 4.30 tons/hae0
- Comparator
- 26,666 plants/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“53,000 plants/ha recorded high grain yield 4.51; 4.30 tons/ha in comparison with 26,666 plants/ha 2.48; 1.10 when 17,777 plants/ha 2.02; 1.95 were low in 2002 and 2003 respectively”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · disease · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
50 papers more in this group
See all 54 papers →tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- 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.