Abstract
Water is perhaps the most important single factor that limits crop production in the semi-arid northeast of Nigeria. A four-year field experiment was therefore initiated in 1999 to evaluate the influence of land configuration practices with or without wood-shavings mulch on water conservation, yield and water use efficiency (WUE) of sorghum. The experimental treatments consisted of flat bed (FB), open ridging (OR), tied ridging (TR), FB + mulch (FBM), OR + mulch (ORM), and TR + mulch (TRM). Ridge heights were 15 to 20 cm and furrows were left open (for OR and ORM) or tied (for TR and TRM). Wood-shavings mulch was used at the rate of 5 t ha −1 in 1999, but this was increased to 10 t ha −1 in subsequent years to ensure adequate soil coverage. Differences in soil water storage at various sampling dates were significant only in some cases in each year, but trends were towards greater soil water storage in the mulched treatments than in the non-mulched treatments, irrespective of tillage method. Growth parameters (plant height and leaf area index) indicated significant differences between treatments on only some measurement dates in each year. Sorghum water use varied significantly between years and treatments. Seasonal water use was greater with FBM, ORM and TRM than with the FB treatment in all cropping seasons. Averaged over the four-year period, mean increases in grain yield relative to the FB treatment were 16 % for OR, 25 % for TR, 77 % for FBM, 50 % for ORM and 57 % for TRM. Pooled across the experimental years, the WUE (ET) of FB, OR, TR, FBM, ORM and TRM were 1.95, 2.12, 2.13, 2.74, 2.36 and 2.48 kg ha −1 mm −1 respectively. The corresponding WUE(R) values for these treatments were 1.26, 1.46, 1.56, 2.22, 1.88 and 1.97 kg ha −1 mm −1 respectively. It is concluded that combining the practice of flat bed cultivation with mulching may eliminate the need for ridging in increasing the productivity of sorghum grain in semi-arid northeast Nigeria.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Mulched treatments tended toward greater soil water storage than non-mulched treatments.
- Treatment
- mulched treatmentse0
- Outcome
- soil water storagee0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- non-mulched treatmentse0
SorghumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“trends were towards greater soil water storage in the mulched treatments than in the non-mulched treatments”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant height and leaf area index differed significantly among treatments on some dates.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Growth parameters (plant height and leaf area index) indicated significant differences between treatments on only some measurement dates in each year”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Seasonal water use was greater under FBM, ORM and TRM than FB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Seasonal water use was greater with FBM, ORM and TRM than with the FB treatment in all cropping seasons”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
OR increased sorghum grain yield by 16 % relative to FB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean increases in grain yield relative to the FB treatment were 16 % for OR, 25 % for TR, 77 % for FBM, 50 % for ORM and 57 % for TRM”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
TR increased sorghum grain yield by 25 % relative to FB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean increases in grain yield relative to the FB treatment were 16 % for OR, 25 % for TR, 77 % for FBM, 50 % for ORM and 57 % for TRM”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
FBM increased sorghum grain yield by 77 % relative to FB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean increases in grain yield relative to the FB treatment were 16 % for OR, 25 % for TR, 77 % for FBM, 50 % for ORM and 57 % for TRM”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
ORM increased sorghum grain yield by 50 % relative to FB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean increases in grain yield relative to the FB treatment were 16 % for OR, 25 % for TR, 77 % for FBM, 50 % for ORM and 57 % for TRM”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
TRM increased sorghum grain yield by 57 % relative to FB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean increases in grain yield relative to the FB treatment were 16 % for OR, 25 % for TR, 77 % for FBM, 50 % for ORM and 57 % for TRM”
t0“SORGHUM”
Claim · model-written summary
Flat bed cultivation with mulch may remove the need for ridging to improve sorghum grain productivity.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“combining the practice of flat bed cultivation with mulching may eliminate the need for ridging in increasing the productivity of sorghum grain in semi-arid northeast Nigeria”
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 →mulching · soil: physics · SorghumResults agree
7 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 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.