Abstract
A field experiment with different tillage practices and land configurations in cotton -maize cropping systems was conducted at TNAU, Coimbatore during 2011-12 and 2012-13. Totally there were 8 treatments which were replicated thrice in a Randomized Block Design. The treatments consisted of three tillage practices viz., conventional tillage, reduced tillage and zero tillage and three types of land configurations viz., flat bed and furrow irrigated raised bed (FIRB) which were compared with the existing practice of ridges and furrows. The result of two cropping cycles revealed that the growth parameters, yield attributes and seed cotton yield of cotton were higher in the reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB which was on par with conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on ridges and furrows (existing practice as check), conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB, reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB and reduced tillage once to cotton alone and planting on FIRB. In maize, better growth, improved yield parameters and higher yield were recorded in the reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB.The lowest yield of cotton and maize was recorded in the zero tillage to both the crops and planting on flat bed. In the cotton-maize system, cotton equivalent yield (CEY) was almost similar in reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (4784 kg/ha), existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (4755 kg/ha) and conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB (4750 kg/ha). With regards to economics for the cotton-maize cropping system as a whole,conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB recorded the highest net return of Rs.1,31,501/ ha/year with a B-C ratio of 2.21 followed by reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (Rs.1,31,361/ha/year) and existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (Rs.1,26,197/ha/year).
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton growth parameters, yield attributes and seed cotton yield were higher under reduced tillage and FIRB, on par with several conventional and reduced tillage configurations.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRBe0
- Outcome
- growth parameters, yield attributes and seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on ridges and furrowse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The result of two cropping cycles revealed that the growth parameters, yield attributes and seed cotton yield of cotton were higher in the reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB which was on par with conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on ridges and furrows (existing practice as check), conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB, reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB and reduced tillage once to cotton alone and planting on FIRB.”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize growth, yield parameters and yield were better under reduced tillage to both crops with FIRB.
- Treatment
- reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRBe0
- Outcome
- growth, improved yield parameters and higher yielde0
- Direction
- bettere0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In maize, better growth, improved yield parameters and higher yield were recorded in the reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton yield was lowest under zero tillage and flat bed planting.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- zero tillage to both the crops and planting on flat bede0
- Outcome
- yield of cottone0
- Direction
- loweste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest yield of cotton and maize was recorded in the zero tillage to both the crops and planting on flat bed.”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize yield was lowest under zero tillage and flat bed planting.
- Treatment
- zero tillage to both the crops and planting on flat bede0
- Outcome
- yield of cotton and maizee0
- Direction
- loweste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest yield of cotton and maize was recorded in the zero tillage to both the crops and planting on flat bed.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton equivalent yield in the cotton–maize system was 4784 kg/ha under reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB.
Verbatim
e0“In the cotton-maize system, cotton equivalent yield (CEY) was almost similar in reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (4784 kg/ha), existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (4755 kg/ha) and conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB (4750 kg/ha).”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton equivalent yield in the cotton–maize system was 4755 kg/ha under existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows.
Verbatim
e0“In the cotton-maize system, cotton equivalent yield (CEY) was almost similar in reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (4784 kg/ha), existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (4755 kg/ha) and conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB (4750 kg/ha).”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton equivalent yield in the cotton–maize system was 4750 kg/ha under conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB.
Verbatim
e0“In the cotton-maize system, cotton equivalent yield (CEY) was almost similar in reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (4784 kg/ha), existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (4755 kg/ha) and conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB (4750 kg/ha).”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton–maize system net return was Rs.1,31,501/ ha/year under conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB.
Verbatim
e0“With regards to economics for the cotton-maize cropping system as a whole,conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB recorded the highest net return of Rs.1,31,501/ ha/year with a B-C ratio of 2.21 followed by reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (Rs.1,31,361/ha/year) and existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (Rs.1,26,197/ha/year).”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton–maize system net return was Rs.1,31,361/ha/year under reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB.
Verbatim
e0“With regards to economics for the cotton-maize cropping system as a whole,conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB recorded the highest net return of Rs.1,31,501/ ha/year with a B-C ratio of 2.21 followed by reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (Rs.1,31,361/ha/year) and existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (Rs.1,26,197/ha/year).”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton–maize system net return was Rs.1,26,197/ha/year under existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows.
Verbatim
e0“With regards to economics for the cotton-maize cropping system as a whole,conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB recorded the highest net return of Rs.1,31,501/ ha/year with a B-C ratio of 2.21 followed by reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (Rs.1,31,361/ha/year) and existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (Rs.1,26,197/ha/year).”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest net return treatment had a B-C ratio of 2.21.
Verbatim
e0“With regards to economics for the cotton-maize cropping system as a whole,conventional tillage to cotton alone and planting both cotton and maize on the FIRB recorded the highest net return of Rs.1,31,501/ ha/year with a B-C ratio of 2.21 followed by reduced tillage to both cotton and maize and planting on FIRB (Rs.1,31,361/ha/year) and existing practice of conventional tillage to both cotton and maize and planting in ridges and furrows (Rs.1,26,197/ha/year).”
The same questions in other papers
Zea mays · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →Gossypium hirsutum · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →tillage · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
112 papers in the same direction as this paper · 38 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
155 papers more in this group
See all 159 papers →irrigation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
303 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction · 9 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
395 papers more in this group
See all 399 papers →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
790 papers in the same direction as this paper · 209 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 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
- negative
- 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.