Abstract
This research was conducted in a spilt-plot design at the University of Debrecen Látókép Research Station, site (N 47°33’ E 21°27’) in 2015 and repeated in 2016. There were three main plots, each 1.0 ha in size which represents the tillage treatments: moldboard plowing (MT), strip tillage (ST) and ripper tillage (RT). Maize hybrids, Loupiac (FAO 380) and Armagnac(FAO 490) were sown at 80,000 plants ha-1 with a row spacing of 76 cm in the main plots which were subdivided to accommodate three fertiliser treatments (N0 kg ha-1 (control); N80 kg ha-1; N160 kg ha-1) with four replications. The hybrids were harvested at the end of the growing cycle with a Sampo 2010 plot harvester and the grain moisture content was computed at 15% moisture to arrive at the final yield. The findings revealed RT produced the highest yield of 10.37 t ha-1, followed by MT and ST with 10.22 and 9.60 t ha-1 respectively. There was no significant difference(p>0.05) in yield between the RT and MT treatments. However, both the RT and MT were found to be statistically significant (p<0.05) when compared to ST treatment. In 2015, a relatively dry year, yield of ST plots were not significantly different compared to MT and RT plots. A positive interaction between tillage and fertilisation was evident, with higher yield variation (CV=40.07) in the non-fertilised (N0) tillage plots, compared to those which received the N80 and N160 kg ha-1 treatments (CV=22.42). Fertilizer application greatly increased the yield of maize and accounted for 43% of yield variances. The highest yield (11.88 t ha-1) was obtained with N160 kg ha-1 treatment, followed by N80 kg ha-1 ( 10.83 t ha-1), while the lowest yield (7.48 t ha-1) was recorded in the nonfertilised plots(N0 kg ha-1). Year effect was highly significant with vast variation in yield between the two years, ranging from 8.36 t ha-1 in 2015 to 12.43 t ha-1 in 2016 for the same set of agrotechnical inputs. In 2016, higher yield was obtained with increase fertiliser dosage due to favourable growing condition which allowed for better fertiliser utilisation. However, with 2015 being a relatively dry year there was no yield increasing effect with higher fertiliser dosage ( N160 kg ha-1 ). Loupiac (FAO 380) was the better performing hybrid, with a yield of 11.09 t ha-1 compared Armagnac (FAO 490) with 10.60 t ha-1 . The adaptability traits of the two hybrids appears very similar, since the yield differential between the two hybrids was almost constant (0.48 vs 0.49) in both years , despite the vast variation in weather condition.
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Ripper tillage gave the highest maize yield of 10.37 t ha-1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“moldboard plowing (MT), strip tillage (ST) and ripper tillage (RT)”
e1“The findings revealed RT produced the highest yield of 10.37 t ha-1, followed by MT and ST with 10.22 and 9.60 t ha-1 respectively”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Moldboard plowing gave a lower maize yield of 10.22 t ha-1 than ripper tillage
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“moldboard plowing (MT), strip tillage (ST) and ripper tillage (RT)”
e1“The findings revealed RT produced the highest yield of 10.37 t ha-1, followed by MT and ST with 10.22 and 9.60 t ha-1 respectively”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Strip tillage gave a lower maize yield of 9.60 t ha-1 than ripper tillage
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“moldboard plowing (MT), strip tillage (ST) and ripper tillage (RT)”
e1“The findings revealed RT produced the highest yield of 10.37 t ha-1, followed by MT and ST with 10.22 and 9.60 t ha-1 respectively”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Ripper tillage and moldboard plowing gave no significant yield difference
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“There was no significant difference(p>0.05) in yield between the RT and MT treatments”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Ripper tillage and moldboard plowing gave significantly higher yield than strip tillage
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The findings revealed RT produced the highest yield of 10.37 t ha-1, followed by MT and ST with 10.22 and 9.60 t ha-1 respectively”
e3“However, both the RT and MT were found to be statistically significant (p<0.05) when compared to ST treatment”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2015, a dry year, strip tillage yield did not differ from moldboard plowing or ripper tillage
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“In 2015, a relatively dry year, yield of ST plots were not significantly different compared to MT and RT plots”
e1“The findings revealed RT produced the highest yield of 10.37 t ha-1, followed by MT and ST with 10.22 and 9.60 t ha-1 respectively”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize yield variation was higher in non-fertilised tillage plots than in fertilised plots
- Treatment
- non-fertilised (N0)e5
- Outcome
- yield variatione5
- Direction
- highere5
- Value
- CV=40.07e5
- Comparator
- N80 and N160 kg ha-1e5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“with higher yield variation (CV=40.07) in the non-fertilised (N0) tillage plots, compared to those which received the N80 and N160 kg ha-1 treatments (CV=22.42)”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage and fertilisation interacted positively for maize yield
- Treatment
- tillage and fertilisatione5
- Outcome
- interaction between tillage and fertilisatione5
- Direction
- positivee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A positive interaction between tillage and fertilisation was evident”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer application increased maize yield
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“Fertilizer application greatly increased the yield of maize and accounted for 43% of yield variances”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer application accounted for 43% of maize yield variance
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“Fertilizer application greatly increased the yield of maize and accounted for 43% of yield variances”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
N160 kg ha-1 gave the highest maize yield of 11.88 t ha-1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“The highest yield (11.88 t ha-1) was obtained with N160 kg ha-1 treatment, followed by N80 kg ha-1 ( 10.83 t ha-1), while the lowest yield (7.48 t ha-1) was recorded in the nonfertilised plots(N0 kg ha-1)”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
N80 kg ha-1 gave a maize yield of 10.83 t ha-1, below N160 kg ha-1
- Treatment
- N80 kg ha-1e7
- Outcome
- yielde7
- Direction
- lowerinferrede7
- Value
- 10.83 t ha-1e7
- Comparator
- N160 kg ha-1e7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“The highest yield (11.88 t ha-1) was obtained with N160 kg ha-1 treatment, followed by N80 kg ha-1 ( 10.83 t ha-1), while the lowest yield (7.48 t ha-1) was recorded in the nonfertilised plots(N0 kg ha-1)”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Non-fertilised plots gave the lowest maize yield of 7.48 t ha-1
- Treatment
- nonfertilised plotse7
- Outcome
- yielde7
- Direction
- loweste7
- Value
- 7.48 t ha-1e7
- Comparator
- N160 kg ha-1e7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“The highest yield (11.88 t ha-1) was obtained with N160 kg ha-1 treatment, followed by N80 kg ha-1 ( 10.83 t ha-1), while the lowest yield (7.48 t ha-1) was recorded in the nonfertilised plots(N0 kg ha-1)”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Loupiac (FAO 380) gave a higher yield of 11.09 t ha-1 than Armagnac (FAO 490)
- Material
- Loupiac (FAO 380)e1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- bettere1
- Value
- 11.09 t ha-1e1
- Comparator
- Armagnac (FAO 490)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Loupiac (FAO 380) was the better performing hybrid, with a yield of 11.09 t ha-1 compared Armagnac (FAO 490) with 10.60 t ha-1”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
The yield difference between the two hybrids was almost constant in both years
- Outcome
- yield differential between the two hybridse2
- Direction
- constante2
- Value
- 0.48 vs 0.49e2
- Setting
- both yearse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“the yield differential between the two hybrids was almost constant (0.48 vs 0.49) in both years”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield varied strongly between 2015 and 2016 with a highly significant year effect
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“Year effect was highly significant with vast variation in yield between the two years, ranging from 8.36 t ha-1 in 2015 to 12.43 t ha-1 in 2016”
t0“yield of maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids”
The same questions in other 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 →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.