Paper · 2017 · Legume Research - An International Journal

Long term effect of legume intensified crop rotations and tillage practices on productivity and profitability of maize vis-a-vis soil fertility in North-Western Indo-Gangetic Plains of India

M. R. Yadav; C. M. Parihar; S. L. Jat; et al.

12
claims
22
verbatim quotes
11
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The present study was planned to evaluate the long term effect of legume intensified maize based crop rotations and tillage practices on productivity, profitability of maize vis-a-vis soil health. The experiment consisted of three tillage practices i.e. zero tillage (ZT), permanent bed (PB) and conventional tillage (CT) as main plot treatments and four crop rotations (MWMb; maize-wheat-mungbean, MCS; maize-chickpea-Sesbania, MMuMb; maize-mustard-mungbean, MMS; maize-maize-Sesbania) as sub plot treatments. Results revealed that ZT and PB resulted into significantly (P less than 0.05) improvement in grain (7.7-14.2%) and stover yield (7.4-13.0%) of maize over CT. Similarly, maize grain and stover yield were invariably higher in MCS and MWMb systems compared to MMuMb and MMS rotations. The total soil carbon (TSC) content increased by 15.4-17.4 and 20.32-20.91% with ZT and PB over CT in 0-15 and 15-30 cm soil depths, respectively. However, MCS and MWMb rotations registered 11.3-18.0% (0-15 cm) and 8.4-11.0% (15-30 cm) higher TSC over MMuMb rotation. Similarly, ZT and PB resulted into significantly (P less than 0.05) improvement in available soil nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) compared to CT. ZT/PB under MCS crop rotations registered higher net returns and BC ratio compared to rest of the treatment combinations. Interaction effect of tillage and crop rotations were significant (P less than 0.05) for stover yield, net returns, BC ratio and TSC and all these parameters were reported maximum with ZT-MCS. Thus, the present study suggests that CA based crop management practices can be advocated as sustainable intensification strategy in north-western India.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zero tillage and permanent beds increased maize grain yield over conventional tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
ZT and PBe0
Outcome
graine0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
7.7-14.2%e0
Comparator
CTe0

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

“ZT and PB resulted into significantly (P less than 0.05) improvement in grain (7.7-14.2%) and stover yield (7.4-13.0%) of maize over CT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 533–668 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zero tillage and permanent beds increased maize stover yield over conventional tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
ZT and PBe0
Outcome
stover yielde0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
7.4-13.0%e0
Comparator
CTe0

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

“ZT and PB resulted into significantly (P less than 0.05) improvement in grain (7.7-14.2%) and stover yield (7.4-13.0%) of maize over CT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 533–668 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MCS and MWMb had higher maize grain and stover yield than MMuMb and MMS.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
MCS and MWMb systemse0
Outcome
grain and stover yielde0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
MMuMb and MMS rotationse0

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

“maize grain and stover yield were invariably higher in MCS and MWMb systems compared to MMuMb and MMS rotations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 681–792 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ZT and PB increased total soil carbon by 15.4 to 17.4% in surface soil.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
ZT and PBe0
Outcome
total soil carbon (TSC) contente0
Direction
increasede0
Value
15.4-17.4e0
Qualifier
0-15e0
Comparator
CTe0

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

“The total soil carbon (TSC) content increased by 15.4-17.4 and 20.32-20.91% with ZT and PB over CT in 0-15 and 15-30 cm soil depths, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 794–940 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ZT and PB increased total soil carbon by 20.32 to 20.91% in deeper soil.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
ZT and PBe0
Outcome
total soil carbon (TSC) contente0
Direction
increasede0
Value
20.32-20.91%e0
Qualifier
15-30 cme0
Comparator
CTe0

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

“The total soil carbon (TSC) content increased by 15.4-17.4 and 20.32-20.91% with ZT and PB over CT in 0-15 and 15-30 cm soil depths, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 794–940 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MCS and MWMb rotations had higher surface soil carbon than MMuMb.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
MCS and MWMb rotationse0
Outcome
TSCe0
Direction
highere0
Value
11.3-18.0%e0
Qualifier
0-15 cme0
Comparator
MMuMb rotatione0

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

“MCS and MWMb rotations registered 11.3-18.0% (0-15 cm) and 8.4-11.0% (15-30 cm) higher TSC over MMuMb rotation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 950–1060 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MCS and MWMb rotations had higher deeper soil carbon than MMuMb.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
MCS and MWMb rotationse0
Outcome
TSCe0
Direction
highere0
Value
8.4-11.0%e0
Qualifier
15-30 cme0
Comparator
MMuMb rotatione0

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

“MCS and MWMb rotations registered 11.3-18.0% (0-15 cm) and 8.4-11.0% (15-30 cm) higher TSC over MMuMb rotation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 950–1060 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

ZT and PB significantly improved available soil nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium relative to CT.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
ZT and PBe0
Outcome
available soil nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K)e0
Direction
improvemente0
Comparator
CTe0

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

“ZT and PB resulted into significantly (P less than 0.05) improvement in available soil nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) compared to CT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1073–1221 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ZT or PB with MCS had higher net returns and benefit cost ratio than other combinations.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
ZT/PB under MCS crop rotationse0
Outcome
net returns and BC ratioe0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
rest of the treatment combinationse0

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

“ZT/PB under MCS crop rotations registered higher net returns and BC ratio compared to rest of the treatment combinations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1223–1343 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Tillage and rotation interacted significantly for stover yield, net returns and benefit cost ratio.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
tillage and crop rotationse0
Outcome
stover yield, net returns, BC ratio and TSCe0

Not reportedDirection

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

“Interaction effect of tillage and crop rotations were significant (P less than 0.05) for stover yield, net returns, BC ratio and TSC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1345–1477 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ZT with MCS maximized stover yield, returns, benefit cost ratio and soil carbon.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Treatment
ZT-MCSe0
Outcome
stover yield, net returns, BC ratio and TSCe1
Direction
maximume0

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

e0

“all these parameters were reported maximum with ZT-MCS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1482–1536 · show in text ↑
e1

“stover yield, net returns, BC ratio and TSC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1434–1477 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors advocate conservation agriculture management for sustainable intensification in north western India.

Taxon
maizeZea mayst0
Outcome
CA based crop management practicese0
Setting
north-western Indiae0

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

“CA based crop management practices can be advocated as sustainable intensification strategy in north-western India”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1576–1690 · show in text ↑
t0

“maize”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 113–118 · show in text ↑

rotation · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 18 positive, 3 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

tillage · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

82 papers: 68 positive, 14 negative or no effect

67 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

78 papers more in this group

See all 82 papers →

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

322 papers: 254 positive, 68 negative or no effect

253 papers in the same direction as this paper · 52 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

318 papers more in this group

See all 322 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. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

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.