Abstract
A field study was conducted on the ongoing research project “Resource conservation technologies for stabilizing yield under different cropping system” of Bihar Agricultural University, Sabour, Bhagalpur (Bihar) initiated in the year 2011, to study the effect of conservation agriculture (CA)on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptake in maize crop under maize based cropping systems. To fulfill this study, the soil and plant samples were collected from these permanent CA plots which contains three main plots of various tillage practices viz. Zero tillage (ZT), Permanent raised bed (PB) and Conventional tillage (CT) and in sub-plot with three different cropping sequences viz. maize-maize (M-M), maize-wheat (M-W) and maize-chickpea (M-C) in a split plot design. Results showed that there was no significant effect of tillage practices and cropping system on soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC) but the management performed in the CA plots improved soil organic carbon (SOC) content, cation exchange capacity (CEC) and nutrient availability in ZT and M-C over other tillage practices and cropping systems. The highest yield gain for tillage practices was in ZT (297 Kg ha-1) over PB (173 Kg ha-1) as compared with CT and for cropping systems M-C (197 Kg ha-1) over M-M (123 Kg ha-1) as compared with M-C. Uptake of the nutrients was more in ZT and M-C over other tillage practices and cropping systems. Overall, it can be concluded that ZT and M-C was best tillage practice and cropping system, respectively as compared with other tillage practices and cropping systems.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage practice and cropping system had no significant effect on soil pH and electrical conductivity.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Long-term effect of conservation agriculture on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptakein maize crop under maize based cropping systems”
e1“Results showed that there was no significant effect of tillage practices and cropping system on soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC)”
Claim · model-written summary
Management in the conservation agriculture plots improved soil organic carbon, cation exchange capacity and nutrient availability in ZT and M-C.
- Treatment
- the management performed in the CA plotse2
- Outcome
- soil organic carbon (SOC) content, cation exchange capacity (CEC) and nutrient availabilitye2
- Direction
- improvede2
- Qualifier
- in ZT and M-Ce2
- Comparator
- other tillage practices and cropping systemse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Long-term effect of conservation agriculture on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptakein maize crop under maize based cropping systems”
e2“the management performed in the CA plots improved soil organic carbon (SOC) content, cation exchange capacity (CEC) and nutrient availability in ZT and M-C over other tillage practices and cropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage gave the highest yield gain over permanent raised bed.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Long-term effect of conservation agriculture on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptakein maize crop under maize based cropping systems”
e3“The highest yield gain for tillage practices was in ZT (297 Kg ha-1) over PB (173 Kg ha-1) as compared with CT and for cropping systems M-C (197 Kg ha-1) over M-M (123 Kg ha-1) as compared with M-C”
Claim · model-written summary
The M-C cropping sequence gave the highest yield gain over M-M.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Long-term effect of conservation agriculture on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptakein maize crop under maize based cropping systems”
e3“The highest yield gain for tillage practices was in ZT (297 Kg ha-1) over PB (173 Kg ha-1) as compared with CT and for cropping systems M-C (197 Kg ha-1) over M-M (123 Kg ha-1) as compared with M-C”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient uptake was higher under ZT and M-C than under other tillage practices and cropping systems.
- Treatment
- ZT and M-Ce4
- Outcome
- Uptake of the nutrientse4
- Direction
- moree4
- Comparator
- other tillage practices and cropping systemse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Long-term effect of conservation agriculture on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptakein maize crop under maize based cropping systems”
e4“Uptake of the nutrients was more in ZT and M-C over other tillage practices and cropping systems”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that ZT and M-C were the best tillage practice and cropping system.
- Outcome
- best tillage practice and cropping systeme5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Long-term effect of conservation agriculture on soil properties, yield and nutrient uptakein maize crop under maize based cropping systems”
e5“ZT and M-C was best tillage practice and cropping system, respectively as compared with other tillage practices and cropping systems”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
67 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
78 papers more in this group
See all 82 papers →tillage · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
92 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 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.