Abstract
Tillage a pivotal practice for seed bed preparation, soil moisture conservation and weed control which ultimately leads to greater crop production. The present study was a long-term maize-based conservation agriculture field experiment which was established in 2013-14 at experimental farm of Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur. It was devised to compare the effect of zero tillage, permanent beds and the conventional tillage on growth and yield of the fifth year rabi season crops. In the split plot design, three tillage practices viz. zero tillage (ZT), conventional tillage (CT) and permanent bed (PB) were kept in main plot and four rabi crops viz. wheat, rabi maize, mustard and chickpea were kept in sub plot and the treatment combination were replicated thrice. The results revealed that higher grain yield of wheat was recorded under PB (5488 kg ha-1) over ZT and CT while, the higher grain yield of rabi maize (11279 kg ha-1), mustard (970 kg ha-1) and chickpea (1936 kg ha-1) was recorded in ZT over CT. Conservation agriculture-based tillage practices viz. zero tillage and permanent bed along with residue retention resulted in significant increase in plant height, biomass production and productivity of rabi crops as compared to conventional tillage practice.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Permanent beds gave the highest wheat grain yield of 5488 kg ha-1 over zero and conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- PBe0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5488 kg ha-1e0
- Comparator
- ZT and CTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher grain yield of wheat was recorded under PB (5488 kg ha-1) over ZT and CT”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage gave higher rabi maize grain yield, 11279 kg ha-1, than conventional tillage.
Verbatim
e0“higher grain yield of rabi maize (11279 kg ha-1), mustard (970 kg ha-1) and chickpea (1936 kg ha-1) was recorded in ZT over CT”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage gave higher mustard grain yield, 970 kg ha-1, than conventional tillage.
Verbatim
e0“higher grain yield of rabi maize (11279 kg ha-1), mustard (970 kg ha-1) and chickpea (1936 kg ha-1) was recorded in ZT over CT”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage gave higher chickpea grain yield, 1936 kg ha-1, than conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinume0 - Treatment
- ZTe0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1936 kg ha-1e0
- Comparator
- CTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher grain yield of rabi maize (11279 kg ha-1), mustard (970 kg ha-1) and chickpea (1936 kg ha-1) was recorded in ZT over CT”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation tillage with residue retention significantly increased rabi crop height, biomass and productivity versus conventional tillage.
Verbatim
e0“Conservation agriculture-based tillage practices viz. zero tillage and permanent bed along with residue retention resulted in significant increase in plant height, biomass production and productivity of rabi crops as compared to conventional tillage practice”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
78 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
93 papers more in this group
See all 97 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.