Paper · 2011 · SCIndeks

Long Term Effects of Different Tillage Systems Influencing Yield and Energy Efficiency In Maize (Zea Mays L.)

Nebojša Momirović; Žеlјkо Dоliјаnоvić; Mićo Oljača; et al.

2
claims
5
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · other-oa

Abstract

Adoption and improvement of different tillage systems toward agricultural sustainability has a great social, economical and environmental impact. The base of sustainability is a system productivity as ratio of output to input in a given system, measured in the same units, commonly as energy requirements. The objective of this study was to evaluate the aspect of energy requirements in the different soil tillage systems regarding total energy consumption under conventional tillage. The appropriate measuring at the field conditions, conducted during the period of investigation 1998-2010 on the soil type of slightly calcareous Chernozem. Maize crop was grown under typical Balkan two-crop rotation with winter wheat. Grain yield of maize and energy efficiency were fallowed on the different tillage systems: conventional tillage (CTS - summer tillage of stubble + deep autumn plowing + pre-sowing preparation); reduced tillage (RTS – heavy disc harrowing ); and no-tillage (NT - direct sowing into wheat stubble covered with all amounts of straw residues using no-till planter John Deer Max emerge 2 with the double disc openers). Results of examination have indicated high energy efficiency of No tillage Systems (NTS). Besides statistically lower yields being recorded comparing to a conventional tillage, good results with No-till system have actualizing necessity to continue research on new growing technology and to improve its implementation.

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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

No-tillage systems showed high energy efficiency in maize production.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
No tillage Systemse1
Outcome
energy efficiencye1
Direction
higherinferrede1

Not reportedComparator

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

“Yield and Energy Efficiency In Maize (Zea Mays L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–109 · show in text ↑
e1

“Results of examination have indicated high energy efficiency of No tillage Systems (NTS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1135–1223 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No-tillage gave statistically lower maize grain yields than conventional tillage.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayst0
Treatment
no-tillagee3
Outcome
yieldse2
Direction
lowere2
Comparator
conventional tillagee2

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

“Yield and Energy Efficiency In Maize (Zea Mays L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 59–109 · show in text ↑
e2

“Besides statistically lower yields being recorded comparing to a conventional tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1225–1310 · show in text ↑
e3

“no-tillage (NT - direct sowing into wheat stubble”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1015 · show in text ↑

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

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

286 papers in the same direction as this paper · 812 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

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.