Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at National Maize Research Program (NMRP) in Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal during May-Nov 2013. The experiment was laid out in strip- split design with twelve treatments and three replications. Treatments consisted of two different tillage methods namely conventional tillage (CT) and zero tillage (ZT) as vertical factor, two different levels of residue (residue kept and residue removed) as horizontal factor and three different levels of cropping systems namely sole maize, sole soybean and maize + soybean intercropping system as sub plot factor. Manakamana-3 and Puja were the variety of maize and soybean used for the experiment respectively. The results revealed that the grain yield and yield attributing components of maize and soybean was significantly influenced by cropping systems but not by tillage methods and residue levels. The grain yield of maize obtained under sole cropping (4.76 t ha-1) was significantly higher than maize + soybean intercropping system (4.27 t ha-1). Similarly, the grain yield of sole soybean was significantly higher (1.99 t ha-1) than that of maize + soybean intercropping system (1.26 t ha-1). Moreover, the total grain yield equivalent of 6.45 t ha-1 obtained from sole soybean system was significantly higher and was followed by maize and soybean intercropping system with 4.99 t ha-1. Whereas, sole maize produced significantly the lowest maize grain yield equivalent of 3.47 t ha-1. Significantly, higher LER (1.38) was recorded with maize and soybean intercropping system over sole system (1.0). Tillage and residue levels did not affect the gross and net return and B: C ratio but the effect was found obvious due to intercropping system. Significantly higher net return (NRs.140.49 thousands ha-1) was recorded in intercropping of maize with soybean as compared to sole soybean (NRs. 89.85 thousands ha-1) which was at par with sole maize system (NRs. 80.91 thousands ha-1). Maize and soybean intercropping system produced significantly the higher (2.47) B: C ratio than sole soybean (2.28) and was at par with sole maize (2.18).
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Cropping system significantly influenced maize and soybean grain yield and yield components.
- Taxon
- maize and soybean
Glycine max
Zea mayse0 - Treatment
- cropping systemse0
- Outcome
- grain yield and yield attributing componentse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the grain yield and yield attributing components of maize and soybean was significantly influenced by cropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage methods did not significantly influence maize and soybean grain yield and yield components.
- Taxon
- Maize and SoybeanGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- tillage methodse0
- Outcome
- grain yield and yield attributing componentse0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the grain yield and yield attributing components of maize and soybean was significantly influenced by cropping systems but not by tillage methods and residue levels”
t0“Maize and Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Residue levels did not significantly influence maize and soybean grain yield and yield components.
- Taxon
- Maize and SoybeanGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- residue levelse0
- Outcome
- grain yield and yield attributing componentse0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the grain yield and yield attributing components of maize and soybean was significantly influenced by cropping systems but not by tillage methods and residue levels”
t0“Maize and Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole maize yielded 4.76 t ha-1, significantly more than intercropped maize at 4.27 t ha-1.
- Treatment
- sole croppinge0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4.76 t ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 4.27 t ha-1e0
- Comparator
- maize + soybean intercropping systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The grain yield of maize obtained under sole cropping (4.76 t ha-1) was significantly higher than maize + soybean intercropping system (4.27 t ha-1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole soybean yielded 1.99 t ha-1, significantly more than intercropped soybean at 1.26 t ha-1.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- sole soybeane0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1.99 t ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 1.26 t ha-1e0
- Comparator
- maize + soybean intercropping systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the grain yield of sole soybean was significantly higher (1.99 t ha-1) than that of maize + soybean intercropping system (1.26 t ha-1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole soybean had the highest grain yield equivalent at 6.45 t ha-1, above intercropping at 4.99 t ha-1.
- Taxon
- soybeanGlycine maxe0
- Treatment
- sole soybean systeme0
- Outcome
- total grain yield equivalente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 6.45 t ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 4.99 t ha-1e0
- Comparator
- maize and soybean intercropping systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the total grain yield equivalent of 6.45 t ha-1 obtained from sole soybean system was significantly higher and was followed by maize and soybean intercropping system with 4.99 t ha-1”
Claim · model-written summary
Sole maize had the lowest grain yield equivalent, 3.47 t ha-1.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sole maize produced significantly the lowest maize grain yield equivalent of 3.47 t ha-1”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping had LER 1.38, significantly above sole systems at 1.0.
- Taxon
- maize and soybeanGlycine maxZea mayse0
- Treatment
- maize and soybean intercropping systeme0
- Outcome
- LERe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1.38e0
- Qualifier
- 1.0e0
- Comparator
- sole systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher LER (1.38) was recorded with maize and soybean intercropping system over sole system (1.0)”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage and residue levels did not affect gross and net returns or benefit to cost ratio.
- Taxon
- Maize and SoybeanGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- Tillage and residue levelse0
- Outcome
- gross and net return and B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tillage and residue levels did not affect the gross and net return and B: C ratio”
t0“Maize and Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Cropping system affected gross and net returns and benefit to cost ratio.
- Taxon
- Maize and SoybeanGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- intercropping systeme0
- Outcome
- effecte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“but the effect was found obvious due to intercropping system”
t0“Maize and Soybean”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping net return was NRs.140.49 thousands ha-1, significantly above sole soybean and on par with sole maize.
Verbatim
e0“higher net return (NRs.140.49 thousands ha-1) was recorded in intercropping of maize with soybean as compared to sole soybean (NRs. 89.85 thousands ha-1) which was at par with sole maize system (NRs. 80.91 thousands ha-1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping benefit to cost ratio was 2.47, significantly above sole soybean and on par with sole maize.
- Taxon
- Maize and SoybeanGlycine maxZea mayst0
- Treatment
- Maize and soybean intercropping systeme0
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 2.47e0
- Qualifier
- 2.28e0
- Comparator
- sole soybeane0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize and soybean intercropping system produced significantly the higher (2.47) B: C ratio than sole soybean (2.28) and was at par with sole maize (2.18)”
t0“Maize and Soybean”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
57 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
75 papers more in this group
See all 79 papers →Glycine max · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
154 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
176 papers more in this group
See all 180 papers →intercropping · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results
130 papers in the same direction as this paper · 79 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
214 papers more in this group
See all 218 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
612 papers in the same direction as this paper · 181 in the opposite direction · 40 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
830 papers more in this group
See all 834 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.