Paper · 2013 · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)

Evaluation Of Energy And Environmental Aspects Of Reduced Tillage Systems Applied In Maize Cultivation

E. Sarauskis; L. Masilionyte; Z. Kriauciuniene; et al.

4
claims
7
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · other-oa

Abstract

In maize growing technologies, tillage technological operations are the most time-consuming and require the greatest fuel input. Substitution of conventional tillage, involving deep ploughing, by other reduced tillage methods can reduce technological production costs, diminish soil degradation and environmental pollution from greenhouse gas emissions, as well as improve economic competitiveness of agricultural produce. Experiments designed to assess energy and environmental aspects associated with different reduced tillage systems, applied in maize cultivation were conducted at Aleksandras Stulginskis University taking into account Lithuania’s economic and climate conditions. The study involved 5 tillage treatments: deep ploughing (DP, control), shallow ploughing (SP), deep cultivation (DC), shallow cultivation (SC) and no-tillage (NT). Our experimental evidence suggests that with the application of reduced tillage systems it is feasible to reduce fuel consumption by 13-58% and working time input by 8.4% to nearly 3-fold, to reduce the cost price of maize cultivation technological operations, decrease environmental pollution with CO2 gas by 30 to 146 kg ha-1, compared with the deep ploughing.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reduced tillage reduced fuel consumption by 13-58% versus deep ploughing.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
reduced tillage systemse0
Outcome
fuel consumptione0
Direction
reducee0
Value
13-58%e0
Comparator
deep ploughinge0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“with the application of reduced tillage systems it is feasible to reduce fuel consumption by 13-58% and working time input by 8.4% to nearly 3-fold, to reduce the cost price of maize cultivation technological operations, decrease environmental pollution with CO2 gas by 30 to 146 kg ha-1, compared with the deep ploughing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1210 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reduced tillage reduced working time input by 8.4% to nearly threefold versus deep ploughing.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
reduced tillage systemse0
Outcome
working time inpute0
Direction
reducee0
Value
8.4% to nearly 3-folde0
Comparator
deep ploughinge0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“with the application of reduced tillage systems it is feasible to reduce fuel consumption by 13-58% and working time input by 8.4% to nearly 3-fold, to reduce the cost price of maize cultivation technological operations, decrease environmental pollution with CO2 gas by 30 to 146 kg ha-1, compared with the deep ploughing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1210 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reduced tillage reduced the cost price of maize cultivation operations versus deep ploughing.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
reduced tillage systemse0
Outcome
cost price of maize cultivation technological operationse0
Direction
reducee0
Comparator
deep ploughinge0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“with the application of reduced tillage systems it is feasible to reduce fuel consumption by 13-58% and working time input by 8.4% to nearly 3-fold, to reduce the cost price of maize cultivation technological operations, decrease environmental pollution with CO2 gas by 30 to 146 kg ha-1, compared with the deep ploughing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1210 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reduced tillage decreased environmental CO2 pollution by 30 to 146 kg ha-1 versus deep ploughing.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
reduced tillage systemse0
Outcome
environmental pollution with CO2 gase0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
30 to 146 kg ha-1e0
Comparator
deep ploughinge0

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

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Maize Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–102 · show in text ↑
e0

“with the application of reduced tillage systems it is feasible to reduce fuel consumption by 13-58% and working time input by 8.4% to nearly 3-fold, to reduce the cost price of maize cultivation technological operations, decrease environmental pollution with CO2 gas by 30 to 146 kg ha-1, compared with the deep ploughing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1210 · show in text ↑

tillage · pest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

49 papers: 28 positive, 21 negative or no effect

27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

45 papers more in this group

See all 49 papers →

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. 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.