Abstract
A research study was conducted to examine the crop responses of maize under two irrigation systems, i.e. raised bed and high-efficiency irrigation system (HEIS; drip irrigation) systems, with three irrigation frequencies and three levels of irrigation water quality. The trial was carried out in a completely randomised design mode with triple replication of each treatment. The raised bed irrigation system demonstrated better performance in terms of crop parameters: plant height, biological yield and grain yield for the raised bed system were recorded as 1, 5 and 21%, respectively, higher than the drip irrigation system. Field measurements for the HEIS showed that the biological yield, grain yield and harvest index were quadratically correlated with the frequency of irrigation. Better results were obtained for plots irrigated every 2 or 6 days than for those irrigated every 4 days. Good-quality water raised plant biological yield by 12% and grain yield by 14.85%. The irrigation frequency had a clear-cut effect on total dry matter weight and grain yield was dependent on the quality of the irrigated water. The raised bed with furrow irrigation system produced the highest harvest index for all of the levels of water quality and the highest water use efficiencies were observed for good-quality water. The vigorous crop growth in those plots irrigated using the raised bed irrigation system resulted from salts leaching away from the crop’s root zone; however, because it uses more irrigation water for crop production than the HEIS, this system is not preferred.
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
Raised bed irrigation increased plant height by 1% versus drip irrigation.
- Treatment
- raised bed systeme0
- Outcome
- plant heighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1%e0
- Comparator
- drip irrigation systeme0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plant height, biological yield and grain yield for the raised bed system were recorded as 1, 5 and 21%, respectively, higher than the drip irrigation system.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Raised bed irrigation increased biological yield by 5% versus drip irrigation.
- Treatment
- raised bed systeme0
- Outcome
- biological yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5e0
- Comparator
- drip irrigation systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plant height, biological yield and grain yield for the raised bed system were recorded as 1, 5 and 21%, respectively, higher than the drip irrigation system.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Raised bed irrigation increased grain yield by 21% versus drip irrigation.
- Treatment
- raised bed systeme0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 21%e0
- Comparator
- drip irrigation systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plant height, biological yield and grain yield for the raised bed system were recorded as 1, 5 and 21%, respectively, higher than the drip irrigation system.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Under HEIS, biological yield, grain yield and harvest index had quadratic associations with irrigation frequency.
- Treatment
- frequency of irrigatione0
- Outcome
- biological yield, grain yield and harvest indexe0
- Setting
- Fielde0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Field measurements for the HEIS showed that the biological yield, grain yield and harvest index were quadratically correlated with the frequency of irrigation.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation every 2 days gave better results than every 4 days.
- Treatment
- irrigated every 2 or 6 dayse0
- Outcome
- Better resultse0
- Direction
- Bettere0
- Comparator
- irrigated every 4 dayse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Better results were obtained for plots irrigated every 2 or 6 days than for those irrigated every 4 days.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation every 6 days gave better results than every 4 days.
- Treatment
- irrigated every 2 or 6 dayse0
- Outcome
- Better resultse0
- Direction
- Bettere0
- Comparator
- irrigated every 4 dayse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Better results were obtained for plots irrigated every 2 or 6 days than for those irrigated every 4 days.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Good quality water raised biological yield by 12%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Good-quality water raised plant biological yield by 12% and grain yield by 14.85%.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Good quality water raised grain yield by 14.85%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Good-quality water raised plant biological yield by 12% and grain yield by 14.85%.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation frequency affected total dry matter weight.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The irrigation frequency had a clear-cut effect on total dry matter weight”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield depended on irrigation water quality.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain yield was dependent on the quality of the irrigated water.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Raised bed furrow irrigation gave the highest harvest index at every water quality level.
- Treatment
- raised bed with furrow irrigation systeme0
- Outcome
- harvest indexe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Qualifier
- for all of the levels of water qualitye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The raised bed with furrow irrigation system produced the highest harvest index for all of the levels of water quality”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Good quality water produced the highest water use efficiencies.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the highest water use efficiencies were observed for good-quality water.”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Salt leaching from the root zone explained vigorous growth under raised bed irrigation.
- Treatment
- raised bed irrigation systeme0
- Outcome
- vigorous crop growthe0
- Qualifier
- salts leaching away from the crop’s root zonee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The vigorous crop growth in those plots irrigated using the raised bed irrigation system resulted from salts leaching away from the crop’s root zone”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
Raised bed irrigation used more water than HEIS.
Not reportedTreatment
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“it uses more irrigation water for crop production than the HEIS”
t0“maize crops”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors do not prefer raised bed irrigation because it uses more water.
- Outcome
- this system is not preferrede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“because it uses more irrigation water for crop production than the HEIS, this system is not preferred.”
t0“maize crops”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 papers →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
790 papers in the same direction as this paper · 209 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 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
- positive
- no effect
- negative
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.