Abstract
The extent of land affected by degradation in Uganda ranges from 20% in relatively flat and vegetation-covered areas to 90% in the eastern and southwestern highlands. Land degradation has adversely affected smallholder agro-ecosystems including direct damage and loss of critical ecosystem services such as agricultural land/soil and biodiversity. This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district. Bare ground was determined by a supervised multi-band satellite image classification using the Maximum Likelihood Classifier (MLC). Field trials on maize and bean grain yield responses to tillage practices used a randomized complete block design with three replications, evaluating conventional farmer practice (CFP); permanent planting basins (PPB); and rip lines, with or without fertilizer in maize and bean rotations. Bare ground coverage in the Nakasongola District was 187 km2 (11%) of the 1741 km2 of arable land due to extreme cases of soil compaction. All practices, whether conventional or the newly introduced conservation farming practices in combination with fertilizer increased bean and maize grain yields, albeit with minimal statistical significance in some cases. The newly introduced conservation farming tillage practices increased the bean grain yield relative to conventional practices by 41% in PPBs and 43% in rip lines. In maize, the newly introduced conservation farming tillage practices increased the grain yield by 78% on average, relative to conventional practices. Apparently, conservation farming tillage methods proved beneficial relative to conventional methods on degraded soils, with the short-term benefit of increasing land productivity leading to better harvests and food security.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Bare ground covered 187 km2 (11%) of the arable land in Nakasongola District, due to extreme soil compaction.
- Taxon
- maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)
Phaseolus vulgaris
Zea mayse0 - Outcome
- Bare ground coveragee1
- Value
- 187 km2 (11%)e1
- Qualifier
- due to extreme cases of soil compactione1
- Setting
- Nakasongola Districte1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district”
e1“Bare ground coverage in the Nakasongola District was 187 km2 (11%) of the 1741 km2 of arable land due to extreme cases of soil compaction”
Claim · model-written summary
All practices with fertilizer increased bean grain yield, with minimal statistical significance in some cases.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district”
e2“All practices, whether conventional or the newly introduced conservation farming practices in combination with fertilizer increased bean and maize grain yields, albeit with minimal statistical significance in some cases”
Claim · model-written summary
All practices with fertilizer increased maize grain yield, with minimal statistical significance in some cases.
- Treatment
- in combination with fertilizere2
- Outcome
- grain yieldse2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Qualifier
- albeit with minimal statistical significance in some casese2
- Comparator
- conventionale2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district”
e2“All practices, whether conventional or the newly introduced conservation farming practices in combination with fertilizer increased bean and maize grain yields, albeit with minimal statistical significance in some cases”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation farming tillage practices increased bean grain yield by 41% relative to conventional practices in permanent planting basins.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district”
e3“The newly introduced conservation farming tillage practices increased the bean grain yield relative to conventional practices by 41% in PPBs and 43% in rip lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation farming tillage practices increased bean grain yield by 43% relative to conventional practices in rip lines.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district”
e3“The newly introduced conservation farming tillage practices increased the bean grain yield relative to conventional practices by 41% in PPBs and 43% in rip lines”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation farming tillage practices increased maize grain yield by 78% on average relative to conventional practices.
- Treatment
- conservation farming tillage practicese4
- Outcome
- grain yielde4
- Direction
- increasede4
- Value
- 78%e4
- Qualifier
- on averagee4
- Comparator
- conventional practicese4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district”
e4“In maize, the newly introduced conservation farming tillage practices increased the grain yield by 78% on average, relative to conventional practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation farming tillage methods are beneficial relative to conventional methods on degraded soils, with a short-term benefit of increased land productivity.
- Taxon
- maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.)Phaseolus vulgarisZea mayse0
- Treatment
- conservation farming tillage methodse5
- Outcome
- land productivitye5
- Direction
- increasinge5
- Qualifier
- on degraded soilse5
- Comparator
- conventional methodse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This study evaluated the extent of bare grounds in Nakasongola, one of the districts in the Cattle Corridor of Uganda and the yield responses of maize (Zea mays) and common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) to different tillage methods in the district”
e5“Apparently, conservation farming tillage methods proved beneficial relative to conventional methods on degraded soils, with the short-term benefit of increasing land productivity leading to better harvests and food security”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
60 papers more in this group
See all 64 papers →fertilization · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
330 papers in the same direction as this paper · 42 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
372 papers more in this group
See all 376 papers →tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3,484 papers in the same direction as this paper · 338 in the opposite direction · 85 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 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.