Paper · 2007

TILLAGE AND MULCH EFFECTS ON PROFILE MOISTURE DYNAMICS, FALLOW EFFICIENCY AND RAINFED WHEAT YIELDS IN POTOWAR

Shahzada Sohail Ijaz; Safdar Ali

12
claims
24
verbatim quotes
6
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The field experiment was conducted in Potowar plateau for two years (2004-05 and 2005-06) to monitor the effect of different fallowing practices on soil moisture dynamics, fallow efficiency and wheat yield. At summer start, conventional cultivator (CC), sub-soiler (SS), mouldboard plow (MP) and minimum tillage (MT) were applied as main plot treatments and no mulch and straw mulch @ 4 Mg ha' in SUbplots. During winter the whole plot was under wheat. It was observed that the soil moisture increased significantly after the summer and winter rainfalls and dropped significantly in the periods in between, the highest being after summer rainfall (average 0.23m3 rn), The tillage systems differed significantly for Volumetric Soil Water (VSW) at wheat sowing, where MT showed significantly low VSW than other tillage systems (15-23% lower than CC). The differences in VSW on other sampling months were practically minor. Though numerically higher, mulch treatments generally showed nonsignificant differences. Fallow efficiency (FE) ranged from 22.82% to 33.25%. The MP showed higher or equal FE than CC, while MT consistently showed lowest. Wheat dry matter ranged between 4.86 and 9.34 Mg ha and did not differ among tillage systems except that MT showed lower values in 2004-05. The MP and MT gave 29% and 30% higher grain yields than CC during 2004-05 and 2005-06, respectively. Grain yield was 33% higher in mulch than no mulch. The mouldbaord plow with mulch was more promising system for better wheat production in the

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

Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil moisture rose after rainfall and fell between rainfalls.

Outcome
soil moisturee0
Direction
increasede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“soil moisture increased significantly after the summer and winter rainfalls and dropped significantly in the periods in between”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 478–605 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum tillage had 15-23% lower VSW at sowing than conventional cultivation.

Treatment
MTe0
Outcome
VSWe0
Direction
lowere0
Value
15-23%e0
Comparator
CCe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“MT showed significantly low VSW than other tillage systems (15-23% lower than CC)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 766–847 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Mulching yielded numerically higher but nonsignificant moisture differences.

Treatment
mulch treatmentse0
Outcome
nonsignificant differencese0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Though numerically higher, mulch treatments generally showed nonsignificant differences”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 921–1008 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fallow efficiency ranged from 22.82% to 33.25%.

Outcome
Fallow efficiencye0
Value
22.82% to 33.25%e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fallow efficiency (FE) ranged from 22.82% to 33.25%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1061 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mouldboard plowing had at least as high fallow efficiency as conventional cultivation.

Treatment
MPe0
Outcome
FEe0
Direction
higher or equale0
Comparator
CCe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The MP showed higher or equal FE than CC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1063–1103 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum tillage consistently had the lowest fallow efficiency.

Treatment
MTe0
Outcome
Fallow efficiencye1
Direction
loweste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“MT consistently showed lowest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1111–1140 · show in text ↑
e1

“Fallow efficiency (FE)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1010–1032 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat dry matter ranged from 4.86 to 9.34 Mg ha.

Outcome
dry mattere0
Value
4.86 and 9.34 Mg hae0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wheat dry matter ranged between 4.86 and 9.34 Mg ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1142–1193 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum tillage produced lower dry matter in 2004-05.

Treatment
MTe0
Outcome
dry mattere1
Direction
lowere0
Qualifier
2004-05e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“MT showed lower values in 2004-05”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1247–1280 · show in text ↑
e1

“Wheat dry matter ranged between 4.86 and 9.34 Mg ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1142–1193 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mouldboard plowing raised grain yield by 29% over conventional cultivation in 2004-05.

Treatment
MPe0
Outcome
grain yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Value
29%e0
Qualifier
2004-05e0
Comparator
CCe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The MP and MT gave 29% and 30% higher grain yields than CC during 2004-05 and 2005-06, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1282–1381 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum tillage raised grain yield by 30% over conventional cultivation in 2005-06.

Treatment
MTe0
Outcome
grain yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Value
30%e0
Qualifier
2005-06e0
Comparator
CCe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The MP and MT gave 29% and 30% higher grain yields than CC during 2004-05 and 2005-06, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1282–1381 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mulching raised grain yield by 33% over no mulch.

Treatment
mulche0
Outcome
Grain yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
33%e0
Comparator
no mulche0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Grain yield was 33% higher in mulch than no mulch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1383–1432 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors judged mouldboard plowing with mulch promising for wheat production.

Outcome
mouldbaord plow with mulche0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The mouldbaord plow with mulch was more promising system for better wheat production in the”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1434–1525 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT YIELDS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 86–98 · show in text ↑

tillage · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

142 papers: 118 positive, 24 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 118 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

138 papers more in this group

See all 142 papers →

mulching · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

149 papers: 137 positive, 12 negative or no effect

136 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

145 papers more in this group

See all 149 papers →

tillage · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

267 papers: 208 positive, 59 negative or no effect

58 papers in the same direction as this paper · 208 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

263 papers more in this group

See all 267 papers →

tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

1,414 papers: 1,116 positive, 298 negative or no effect

1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1,410 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 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.