Abstract
A field experiment was conducted during the rainy (kharif) and winter (rabi) seasons from 2012–13 to 2014–15 at Ballowal Saunkhri, Punjab, to study the effect of tillage and sources of nitrogen (N) on crop productivity and soil health in maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system. The experiment was conducted under rainfed conditions in a split-plot design with 3 replications. In the main plots 2 tillage practices, viz. rotavator and conventional tillage, were assigned and in the subplots 6 nutrient-management practices, viz. control, 40 kg N/ha through urea, 80 kg N/ha through urea, 20 kg N/ha through compost + 20 kg N/ha through urea, 40 kg N/ha through urea + 40 kg N/ha through compost and 20 kg N/ha through compost + 20 kg N/ha through Leucaena leaves, were alloted. Conventional tillage resulted in 15.5 and 0.44 % higher grain yield of maize and wheat (3.10 and 2.26 t/ha respectively) over rotavator (2.62 and 2.25 t/ha respectively). Consequently, system productivity of conventional tillage (5.58 t/ha) in terms of wheat-equivalent yield was 9.7% higher than that with rotavator (5.04 t/ ha). Application of 80 kg N/ha through urea increased the maize yield by 45% and wheat yield by 43% over the control. System productivity was significantly higher when N was applied either through urea (5.65 to 6.51 t/ha) or through urea and organic sources (4.89 to 6.19 t/ha) than the control (3.61 t/ha). The input-energy requirement in conventional tillage was 6.3 and 4.4% higher in maize and wheat than rotavator. In maize, output energy, energy balance, energy-use efficiency and energy productivity were significantly higher in conventional tillage than rotavator. While in wheat energy values were higher in rotavator, these were at par with conventional tillage. Bulk density (1.44 Mg/m3) and soil organic carbon (0.59%) with rotavator improved significantly. Application of 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from compost recorded the highest bulk density (1.41 Mg/m3 ), organic carbon (0.60%), available N (199 kg/ha) and P (29.6 kg/ha). Benefit: cost ratio of the system was significantly higher with rotavator (1.70) and application of 80 kg N/ha (2.07) from urea.
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 19
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage raised maize grain yield 15.5% relative to rotavator.
- Treatment
- Conventional tillagee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 15.5e0
- Comparator
- rotavatore0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Conventional tillage resulted in 15.5 and 0.44 % higher grain yield of maize and wheat (3.10 and 2.26 t/ha respectively) over rotavator (2.62 and 2.25 t/ha respectively).”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage raised wheat grain yield 0.44% relative to rotavator.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- Conventional tillagee0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 0.44 %e0
- Comparator
- rotavatore0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Conventional tillage resulted in 15.5 and 0.44 % higher grain yield of maize and wheat (3.10 and 2.26 t/ha respectively) over rotavator (2.62 and 2.25 t/ha respectively).”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage system productivity was 9.7% higher than rotavator.
- Treatment
- conventional tillagee0
- Outcome
- system productivitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 9.7%e0
- Comparator
- rotavatore0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“system productivity of conventional tillage (5.58 t/ha) in terms of wheat-equivalent yield was 9.7% higher than that with rotavator (5.04 t/ ha).”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Application of 80 kg N/ha through urea increased maize yield by 45% over control.
- Treatment
- 80 kg N/ha through ureae0
- Outcome
- maize yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 45%e0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 80 kg N/ha through urea increased the maize yield by 45% and wheat yield by 43% over the control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Application of 80 kg N/ha through urea increased wheat yield by 43% over control.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- 80 kg N/ha through ureae0
- Outcome
- wheat yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 43%e0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 80 kg N/ha through urea increased the maize yield by 45% and wheat yield by 43% over the control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Urea nitrogen produced significantly higher system productivity than control.
- Treatment
- ureae0
- Outcome
- System productivitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5.65 to 6.51 t/hae0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“System productivity was significantly higher when N was applied either through urea (5.65 to 6.51 t/ha) or through urea and organic sources (4.89 to 6.19 t/ha) than the control (3.61 t/ha).”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Urea and organic nitrogen produced significantly higher system productivity than control.
- Treatment
- urea and organic sourcese0
- Outcome
- System productivitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4.89 to 6.19 t/hae0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“System productivity was significantly higher when N was applied either through urea (5.65 to 6.51 t/ha) or through urea and organic sources (4.89 to 6.19 t/ha) than the control (3.61 t/ha).”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage required 6.3% more input energy for maize than rotavator.
- Treatment
- conventional tillagee0
- Outcome
- input-energy requiremente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 6.3e0
- Comparator
- rotavatore0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The input-energy requirement in conventional tillage was 6.3 and 4.4% higher in maize and wheat than rotavator.”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage required 4.4% more input energy for wheat than rotavator.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- conventional tillagee0
- Outcome
- input-energy requiremente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4.4%e0
- Comparator
- rotavatore0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The input-energy requirement in conventional tillage was 6.3 and 4.4% higher in maize and wheat than rotavator.”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize output energy, energy balance, energy-use efficiency and energy productivity were significantly higher with conventional tillage than rotavator.
- Treatment
- conventional tillagee0
- Outcome
- output energy, energy balance, energy-use efficiency and energy productivitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- rotavatore0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In maize, output energy, energy balance, energy-use efficiency and energy productivity were significantly higher in conventional tillage than rotavator.”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat energy values were higher with rotavator but at par with conventional tillage.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- rotavatore0
- Outcome
- energy valuese0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“While in wheat energy values were higher in rotavator, these were at par with conventional tillage.”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotavator significantly improved soil bulk density.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bulk density (1.44 Mg/m3) and soil organic carbon (0.59%) with rotavator improved significantly.”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotavator significantly improved soil organic carbon.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bulk density (1.44 Mg/m3) and soil organic carbon (0.59%) with rotavator improved significantly.”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Urea plus compost nitrogen produced the highest bulk density of 1.41 Mg/m3.
- Treatment
- 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from composte0
- Outcome
- bulk densitye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 1.41 Mg/m3e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from compost recorded the highest bulk density (1.41 Mg/m3 ), organic carbon (0.60%), available N (199 kg/ha) and P (29.6 kg/ha).”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Urea plus compost nitrogen produced the highest organic carbon of 0.60%.
- Treatment
- 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from composte0
- Outcome
- organic carbone0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 0.60%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from compost recorded the highest bulk density (1.41 Mg/m3 ), organic carbon (0.60%), available N (199 kg/ha) and P (29.6 kg/ha).”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Urea plus compost nitrogen produced the highest available N of 199 kg/ha.
- Treatment
- 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from composte0
- Outcome
- available Ne0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 199 kg/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from compost recorded the highest bulk density (1.41 Mg/m3 ), organic carbon (0.60%), available N (199 kg/ha) and P (29.6 kg/ha).”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Urea plus compost nitrogen produced the highest available P of 29.6 kg/ha.
- Treatment
- 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from composte0
- Outcome
- Pe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 29.6 kg/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 40 kg/ ha N from urea + 40 kg N/ha from compost recorded the highest bulk density (1.41 Mg/m3 ), organic carbon (0.60%), available N (199 kg/ha) and P (29.6 kg/ha).”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Rotavator had a significantly higher system benefit: cost ratio of 1.70.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Benefit: cost ratio of the system was significantly higher with rotavator (1.70) and application of 80 kg N/ha (2.07) from urea.”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
Claim · model-written summary
Application of 80 kg N/ha from urea had a significantly higher system benefit: cost ratio of 2.07.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Benefit: cost ratio of the system was significantly higher with rotavator (1.70) and application of 80 kg N/ha (2.07) from urea.”
e1“maize (Zea mays L.) – wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) cropping system”
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 →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 papers →nitrogen · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,736 papers in the same direction as this paper · 285 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
2,057 papers more in this group
See all 2,061 papers →nitrogen · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1,905 papers in the same direction as this paper · 234 in the opposite direction · 45 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
2,181 papers more in this group
See all 2,185 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.