Abstract
During the last three years cassava production in the Philippines did not progress markedly, neither in area nor in volume. In terms of area, there was only an increase of 14,424 ha or 6.4%, while in terms of volume the increase was 112,177 metric tons or 5.7%. One of the reasons for this was the unstable price for chips, especially in 1994/95. Up to the present, cassava cultivation is still concentrated in Mindanao where there are greater opportunities for marketing, particularly trading of dry chips by the San Miguel Corporation and animal feed millers, as well as fresh roots for production of starch. In terms of research, not much data has been generated, since only very few experiments were conducted. Some experiments were terminated, like the one on cropping systems trials in Negros Occidental. In Leyte the fifth cropping cycle of the long-term fertility trial under coconut showed no significant responses to fertilizers, but there were some responses in the sixth year of consecutive cropping. In the erosion control trial, highest soil losses were observed in plots with application of inorganic fertilizers (14-14-14), while the lowest soil losses were observed in plots with vetiver grass barriers or with grass mulch. Root yields were highest with the application of grass mulch or when Crotalaria juncea was intercropped and mulched at 2 months; yields were lowest in plots with lemon grass barriers. The variety x fertilizer trial in Bontoc, southern Leyte, showed a clear varietal response to fertilizers. The variety with a heavier canopy responded more markedly to fertilizer applications. In an intercropping trial in Bohol, even after three cropping cycles, cassava yields were not significantly affected by interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanut or pole sitao (yard-long bean). However, row spacing significantly affected the yields of cassava and intercrops. In another trial, marked increases in cassava yields were obtained when the plant densify was increased to 15,000-25,000 plants/ha. On the other hand, no significant differences were observed when the age of pruning cassava was varied.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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 18
Claim · model-written summary
The fifth fertility-trial cropping cycle showed no significant fertilizer response.
- Taxon
- cassava
Manihot esculentat0 - Treatment
- fertilizerse0
- Outcome
- responses to fertilizerse0
- Qualifier
- fifth cropping cyclee0
- Setting
- Leytee0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In Leyte the fifth cropping cycle of the long-term fertility trial under coconut showed no significant responses to fertilizers, but there were some responses in the sixth year of consecutive cropping.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
The sixth consecutive cropping year showed some fertilizer response.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- fertilizerse0
- Outcome
- responsese0
- Qualifier
- sixth year of consecutive croppinge0
- Setting
- Leytee0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In Leyte the fifth cropping cycle of the long-term fertility trial under coconut showed no significant responses to fertilizers, but there were some responses in the sixth year of consecutive cropping.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil loss was highest with inorganic fertilizer.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- inorganic fertilizers (14-14-14)e0
- Outcome
- soil lossese0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the erosion control trial, highest soil losses were observed in plots with application of inorganic fertilizers (14-14-14), while the lowest soil losses were observed in plots with vetiver grass barriers or with grass mulch.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil loss was lowest with vetiver grass barriers.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- vetiver grass barrierse0
- Outcome
- soil lossese0
- Direction
- loweste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the erosion control trial, highest soil losses were observed in plots with application of inorganic fertilizers (14-14-14), while the lowest soil losses were observed in plots with vetiver grass barriers or with grass mulch.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil loss was lowest with grass mulch.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- grass mulche0
- Outcome
- soil lossese0
- Direction
- loweste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the erosion control trial, highest soil losses were observed in plots with application of inorganic fertilizers (14-14-14), while the lowest soil losses were observed in plots with vetiver grass barriers or with grass mulch.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Root yield was highest with grass mulch.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- grass mulche0
- Outcome
- Root yieldse0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Root yields were highest with the application of grass mulch or when Crotalaria juncea was intercropped and mulched at 2 months; yields were lowest in plots with lemon grass barriers.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Root yield was highest with intercropped Crotalaria juncea mulched at two months.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- Crotalaria juncea was intercropped and mulched at 2 monthse0
- Interactor
- Crotalaria juncea
Crotalaria junceae0other - Outcome
- Root yieldse0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Root yields were highest with the application of grass mulch or when Crotalaria juncea was intercropped and mulched at 2 months; yields were lowest in plots with lemon grass barriers.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Root yield was lowest with lemon grass barriers.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- lemon grass barrierse0
- Outcome
- Root yieldse0
- Direction
- loweste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Root yields were highest with the application of grass mulch or when Crotalaria juncea was intercropped and mulched at 2 months; yields were lowest in plots with lemon grass barriers.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
The heavier-canopy variety responded more markedly to fertilizer.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentat0
- Material
- The variety with a heavier canopye0
- Treatment
- fertilizer applicationse0
- Outcome
- varietal responsee0
- Direction
- more markedlye0
- Setting
- Bontoc, southern Leytee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The variety x fertilizer trial in Bontoc, southern Leyte, showed a clear varietal response to fertilizers. The variety with a heavier canopy responded more markedly to fertilizer applications.”
t0“cassava”
Claim · model-written summary
Interplanting soybean did not significantly affect cassava yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- interplanting of either soybeane0
- Interactor
- soybean
Glycine maxe0other - Outcome
- cassava yieldse0
- Setting
- Bohole0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In an intercropping trial in Bohol, even after three cropping cycles, cassava yields were not significantly affected by interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanut or pole sitao (yard-long bean).”
Claim · model-written summary
Interplanting mungbean did not significantly affect cassava yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- interplanting of either soybean, mungbeane0
- Interactor
- mungbean
.jpg?width=60)
Vigna radiatae0other - Outcome
- cassava yieldse0
- Setting
- Bohole0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“In an intercropping trial in Bohol, even after three cropping cycles, cassava yields were not significantly affected by interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanut or pole sitao (yard-long bean).”
Claim · model-written summary
Interplanting cowpea did not significantly affect cassava yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpeae0
- Interactor
- cowpea
Vigna unguiculatae0other - Outcome
- cassava yieldse0
- Setting
- Bohole0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In an intercropping trial in Bohol, even after three cropping cycles, cassava yields were not significantly affected by interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanut or pole sitao (yard-long bean).”
Claim · model-written summary
Interplanting peanut did not significantly affect cassava yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanute0
- Interactor
- peanut
Arachis hypogaeae0other - Outcome
- cassava yieldse0
- Setting
- Bohole0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In an intercropping trial in Bohol, even after three cropping cycles, cassava yields were not significantly affected by interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanut or pole sitao (yard-long bean).”
Claim · model-written summary
Interplanting pole sitao did not significantly affect cassava yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanut or pole sitaoe0
- Interactor
- pole sitaoe0other
- Outcome
- cassava yieldse0
- Setting
- Bohole0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In an intercropping trial in Bohol, even after three cropping cycles, cassava yields were not significantly affected by interplanting of either soybean, mungbean, cowpea, peanut or pole sitao (yard-long bean).”
Claim · model-written summary
Row spacing significantly affected cassava yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- row spacinge0
- Outcome
- yields of cassavae0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, row spacing significantly affected the yields of cassava and intercrops.”
Claim · model-written summary
Row spacing significantly affected intercrop yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- row spacinge0
- Outcome
- yields of cassava and intercropse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, row spacing significantly affected the yields of cassava and intercrops.”
Claim · model-written summary
Raising plant density to 15,000–25,000 plants/ha markedly increased cassava yield.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- plant densify was increased to 15,000-25,000 plants/hae0
- Outcome
- cassava yieldse0
- Direction
- increasese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In another trial, marked increases in cassava yields were obtained when the plant densify was increased to 15,000-25,000 plants/ha.”
Claim · model-written summary
Changing pruning age produced no significant differences.
- Taxon
- cassavaManihot esculentae0
- Treatment
- age of pruning cassava was variede0
- Outcome
- differencese0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On the other hand, no significant differences were observed when the age of pruning cassava was varied.”
The same questions in other papers
Vigna radiata · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
Glycine max · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →Arachis hypogaea · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →Vigna unguiculata · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →mulching · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Results differ
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →intercropping · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Results differ
47 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →trap barrier · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.