Abstract
In agriculture, water has become a limiting factor because of the effects of climate change felt by farmers. This situation seriously compromises agricultural production through pockets of drought, delayed and early cessation of rains and then an increase in the length of the dry season. Aims: This study aims to evaluate the effect of tillage and vegetative mulch on soil physical properties and maize water use efficiency in ferralitic soil of southern Benin. Study Design: The Factorial Complete Randomized Block Design with 4 repetitions was implemented. Place and Duration of Study: The experimental site is located at Allada, in southern Benin, and conducted between May 2017 and July 2017. Methodology: Tillage (No-tillage, flat tillage) and straw mulch rate (0%, 50%, 75% soil cover) and their interaction was been tested during this study. The physical properties of soil and maize water use efficiency were determined. Results: Tillage significantly reduced soil temperature by 2.65% and improved soil permeability by 60%. Tillage also significantly improved water use efficiency for maize grain from 3.88 to 7.88 kg.mm-1.ha-1 and for maize biomass from 12.67to 23.31 kg.mm-1.ha-1. Mulching significantly improved soil moisture from 11.54% to 13.13%, water use efficiency for maize grain from 4.26 to 7.58kg.mm-1.ha-1 and for maize biomass from 14.50 to 22.05 kg.mm-1.ha-1. Mulching also significantly reduced soil temperature by 11%. The combination of tillage and mulching significantly improved water use efficiency for maize grain and biomass production. The highest water use efficiency (8.87 kg.mm-1.ha-1 for maize grain and 25.17 kg.mm-1.ha-1 for maize biomass) was achieved with tillage combined with mulching at 75% soil cover. The interaction between these two factors significantly reduced soil temperature by 11.30% (tillage combined with mulch at 75% soil cover) compared to control (no-tillage and no-mulch). Conclusion: This study showed that tillage and mulching at 50% or 75% soil cover improves soil physical properties and water use efficiency for maize production in the context of climate change.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage reduced soil temperature by 2.65%.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tillage significantly reduced soil temperature by 2.65%”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage improved soil permeability by 60%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improved soil permeability by 60%”
t0“Maize”
e1“Tillage significantly reduced soil temperature by 2.65%”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage improved maize grain water use efficiency from 3.88 to 7.88 kg.mm-1.ha-1.
- Treatment
- Tillagee0
- Outcome
- water use efficiency for maize graine0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 3.88 to 7.88 kg.mm-1.ha-1e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tillage also significantly improved water use efficiency for maize grain from 3.88 to 7.88 kg.mm-1.ha-1”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage improved maize biomass water use efficiency from 12.67 to 23.31 kg.mm-1.ha-1.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for maize biomass from 12.67to 23.31 kg.mm-1.ha-1”
t0“Tillage and Mulching on Soil Physical Properties and Water Use Efficiency by Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching improved soil moisture from 11.54% to 13.13%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mulching significantly improved soil moisture from 11.54% to 13.13%”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching improved maize grain water use efficiency from 4.26 to 7.58kg.mm-1.ha-1.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water use efficiency for maize grain from 4.26 to 7.58kg.mm-1.ha-1”
t0“Tillage and Mulching on Soil Physical Properties and Water Use Efficiency by Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching improved maize biomass water use efficiency from 14.50 to 22.05 kg.mm-1.ha-1.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“for maize biomass from 14.50 to 22.05 kg.mm-1.ha-1”
t0“Tillage and Mulching on Soil Physical Properties and Water Use Efficiency by Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching reduced soil temperature by 11%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mulching also significantly reduced soil temperature by 11%”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined tillage and mulching improved maize grain water use efficiency.
- Treatment
- combination of tillage and mulchinge0
- Outcome
- water use efficiency for maize graine0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of tillage and mulching significantly improved water use efficiency for maize grain and biomass production”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined tillage and mulching improved maize biomass production.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of tillage and mulching significantly improved water use efficiency for maize grain and biomass production”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage with 75% mulch cover gave the highest grain water use efficiency, 8.87 kg.mm-1.ha-1.
- Treatment
- tillage combined with mulching at 75% soil covere0
- Outcome
- water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 8.87 kg.mm-1.ha-1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest water use efficiency (8.87 kg.mm-1.ha-1 for maize grain and 25.17 kg.mm-1.ha-1 for maize biomass) was achieved with tillage combined with mulching at 75% soil cover”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage with 75% mulch cover gave the highest biomass water use efficiency, 25.17 kg.mm-1.ha-1.
- Treatment
- tillage combined with mulching at 75% soil covere0
- Outcome
- water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 25.17 kg.mm-1.ha-1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest water use efficiency (8.87 kg.mm-1.ha-1 for maize grain and 25.17 kg.mm-1.ha-1 for maize biomass) was achieved with tillage combined with mulching at 75% soil cover”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage with 75% mulch reduced soil temperature by 11.30% compared with no tillage and no mulch.
- Treatment
- tillage combined with mulch at 75% soil covere0
- Outcome
- soil temperaturee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 11.30%e0
- Comparator
- no-tillage and no-mulche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The interaction between these two factors significantly reduced soil temperature by 11.30% (tillage combined with mulch at 75% soil cover) compared to control (no-tillage and no-mulch)”
t0“Maize”
The same questions in other 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 →mulching · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
108 papers more in this group
See all 112 papers →mulching · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
107 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 papers →mulching · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
121 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
136 papers more in this group
See all 140 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 papers →tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 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.