Abstract
Abstract. The adoption of Conservation agriculture (CA) contributes to sustainable production and its advantages include lower inputs and stable yields. This study was conducted in the research field of Regional Agricultural Research Station, Bhagetada, Dipayal, Doti during 2014 and 2015 to identify the effect of CA on grain yield and income of maize in Maize based cropping system. Both conservation and conventional agricultural (ConvA) practices were evaluated on two maize based cropping systems namely maize-wheat-mungbean (M-W-MB) and maize-lentil-mungbean (M-L-MB). For this purpose two maize varieties namely Raj Kumar and Arun-2 were used. The average productivity of maize under M-L-MB cropping system was 1.6% higher (5.75 t/ha) than M-W-MB cropping system (5.66 t/ha). The average grain yield of maize under CA was 16.7% higher (6.15 t/ha) than ConvA (5.27 t/ha). Rajkumar produced 43% higher average grain yield (6.73 t/ha) than Arun-2 variety (4.69 t/ha). The average net benefit was slightly higher (US$ 597.33/ha) under M-L-MB cropping system than M-W-MB cropping system (US$ 573.89/ha). Similarly, the average net benefit from CA was 102% higher (US$ 783.67/ha) than ConvA (US$ 386.79/ha). Rajkumar variety gave 127% higher average net benefit (US$ 813.49/ha) than Arun-2 (US$ 357.81/ha). The average benefit - cost (B:C) ratio of M-L-MB cropping system was slightly higher (1.72) than the average B:C ratio of M-W-MB cropping system (1.70). The average B:C ratio of CA was 42% higher (2.01) than ConvA (1.41). The average B:C ratio of Rajkumar variety was found 33% higher (1.95) than Arun-2 (1.46). The higher grain yield, net profit and B:C ratio were found in CA practices under M-L-MB cropping system and Rajkumar variety. This study suggests that hybrid maize planting and the adoption of M-L-MB cropping system should be used to increase grain yield and economic performance under CA practices.
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
M-L-MB raised maize productivity 1.6% relative to M-W-MB.
- Treatment
- M-L-MB cropping systeme0
- Outcome
- productivitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1.6%e0
- Qualifier
- 5.75 t/hae0
- Comparator
- M-W-MB cropping systeme0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average productivity of maize under M-L-MB cropping system was 1.6% higher (5.75 t/ha) than M-W-MB cropping system (5.66 t/ha).”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture raised maize grain yield 16.7% relative to conventional practice.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average grain yield of maize under CA was 16.7% higher (6.15 t/ha) than ConvA (5.27 t/ha).”
Claim · model-written summary
Rajkumar yielded 43% more grain than Arun-2.
- Material
- Rajkumare0
- Outcome
- average grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 43%e0
- Qualifier
- 6.73 t/hae0
- Comparator
- Arun-2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rajkumar produced 43% higher average grain yield (6.73 t/ha) than Arun-2 variety (4.69 t/ha).”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
M-L-MB gave slightly higher net benefit than M-W-MB.
- Treatment
- M-L-MB cropping systeme0
- Outcome
- average net benefite0
- Direction
- slightly highere0
- Value
- US$ 597.33/hae0
- Comparator
- M-W-MB cropping systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average net benefit was slightly higher (US$ 597.33/ha) under M-L-MB cropping system than M-W-MB cropping system (US$ 573.89/ha).”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture raised net benefit 102% relative to conventional practice.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the average net benefit from CA was 102% higher (US$ 783.67/ha) than ConvA (US$ 386.79/ha).”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Rajkumar gave 127% higher net benefit than Arun-2.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rajkumar variety gave 127% higher average net benefit (US$ 813.49/ha) than Arun-2 (US$ 357.81/ha).”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
M-L-MB had slightly higher benefit-cost ratio than M-W-MB.
- Treatment
- M-L-MB cropping systeme0
- Outcome
- benefit - cost (B:C) ratioe0
- Direction
- slightly highere0
- Value
- 1.72e0
- Comparator
- M-W-MB cropping systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average benefit - cost (B:C) ratio of M-L-MB cropping system was slightly higher (1.72) than the average B:C ratio of M-W-MB cropping system (1.70).”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture raised benefit-cost ratio 42% relative to conventional practice.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average B:C ratio of CA was 42% higher (2.01) than ConvA (1.41).”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Rajkumar had 33% higher benefit-cost ratio than Arun-2.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average B:C ratio of Rajkumar variety was found 33% higher (1.95) than Arun-2 (1.46).”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher yield, profit and benefit-cost ratio occurred under CA, M-L-MB and Rajkumar.
- Material
- Rajkumare0
- Treatment
- CA practices under M-L-MB cropping systeme0
- Outcome
- grain yield, net profit and B:C ratioe0
- Direction
- highere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The higher grain yield, net profit and B:C ratio were found in CA practices under M-L-MB cropping system and Rajkumar variety.”
t0“grain yield and income of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend hybrid maize and M-L-MB under conservation agriculture.
- Treatment
- M-L-MB cropping systeme0
- Outcome
- increase grain yield and economic performancee0
- Qualifier
- CA practicese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“hybrid maize planting and the adoption of M-L-MB cropping system should be used to increase grain yield and economic performance under CA practices.”
The same questions in other papers
cultivation system · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
109 papers in the same direction as this paper · 40 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
151 papers more in this group
See all 155 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 →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.