Abstract
Abstract Field experiments were conducted at the Teaching and Research Farms, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife in a completely randomized design with five soil-water conservation (SWC) treatments: Contour bunds (CT); Infiltration pits (IP); Mulched plots (ML); Tied ridges (TR); and the Conventional practice (CP), which served as the control. Four (4) levels of soil moisture replenishment [50% (Full Replenishment), 25% (½), 12.5 % (¼), and 6.25 % (1/8)] after depletion to 50% of Field Capacity (FC) were considered as supplementary water application from an in-situ RWH system. Measurements of soil moisture in the soil profile, plant growth parameters and yield at harvest were made. Results showed that maize yield and WUE varied amongst the SWC practices and within the years from the experimental plots with substantial yield improvements. The TR and CT gave better yields compared with the ML and IP of the same year. The 50 and 25% replenishment levels under TR and CT also gave better yield and WUE compared with other levels of replenishment. Biomass yield for the 2008-2010 planting seasons recorded higher values in TR, IP and CT compare to the control experiment, while the moisture retention ability was better in TR and slightly lower in CT of the same year. In 2011 soil moisture replenishment, the 50% gave the highest yield in a TR, followed by the CT and ML treatments. The TR gave the best WUE for the 50% and in all cases the CP gave a comparatively low efficiency. The study concluded that the methods of soil moisture conservation practice is an effective way to increase water availability for higher crop yields; but a combination of the supplementary, in-situ RWH system could produce better results in terms of enhanced yield and mitigate against the adverse effect of short duration intra-seasonal drought.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
The TR and CT soil-water conservation practices gave better maize yields than the ML and IP practices in the same year.
- Treatment
- TR and CTe1
- Outcome
- yieldse1
- Direction
- bettere1
- Comparator
- ML and IPe1
- Setting
- Teaching and Research Farms, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ifee0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e0“Field experiments were conducted at the Teaching and Research Farms, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife”
e1“The TR and CT gave better yields compared with the ML and IP of the same year”
Claim · model-written summary
The 50 and 25% replenishment levels under TR and CT gave better maize yield and WUE than other replenishment levels.
- Treatment
- 50 and 25% replenishment levels under TR and CTe2
- Outcome
- yield and WUEe2
- Direction
- bettere2
- Comparator
- other levels of replenishmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e2“The 50 and 25% replenishment levels under TR and CT also gave better yield and WUE compared with other levels of replenishment”
Claim · model-written summary
Biomass yield in the 2008-2010 planting seasons was higher in TR, IP and CT than in the control experiment.
- Treatment
- TR, IP and CTe3
- Outcome
- Biomass yielde3
- Direction
- highere3
- Qualifier
- 2008-2010 planting seasonse3
- Comparator
- control experimente3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e3“Biomass yield for the 2008-2010 planting seasons recorded higher values in TR, IP and CT compare to the control experiment”
Claim · model-written summary
Moisture retention ability was better in TR than in the other practices in the same year.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e4“while the moisture retention ability was better in TR and slightly lower in CT of the same year”
Claim · model-written summary
Moisture retention ability was slightly lower in CT than in TR in the same year.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e4“while the moisture retention ability was better in TR and slightly lower in CT of the same year”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2011 the 50% soil moisture replenishment gave the highest maize yield in TR, followed by CT and ML.
- Treatment
- soil moisture replenishment, the 50%e5
- Outcome
- yielde5
- Direction
- higheste5
- Qualifier
- In 2011e5
- Comparator
- CT and ML treatmentse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e5“In 2011 soil moisture replenishment, the 50% gave the highest yield in a TR, followed by the CT and ML treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
TR gave the best water use efficiency at the 50% replenishment level.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e6“The TR gave the best WUE for the 50%”
Claim · model-written summary
The control practice CP gave a comparatively low water use efficiency.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e7“in all cases the CP gave a comparatively low efficiency”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil moisture conservation practice is an effective way to increase water availability for higher maize yields.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e1“the methods of soil moisture conservation practice is an effective way to increase water availability for higher crop yields”
Claim · model-written summary
A combination of the supplementary in-situ RWH system could produce better results in enhanced maize yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Maize (Zea mays)”
e1“a combination of the supplementary, in-situ RWH system could produce better results in terms of enhanced yield”
The same questions in other papers
soil water · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
60 papers more in this group
See all 64 papers →tillage · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
79 papers more in this group
See all 83 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.