Paper · 2011 · The Indian Journal of Agricultural Sciences

Tillage and mulching effects on performance of maize (Zea mays)-wheat (Triticum aestivum) cropping system under varying land slopes.

Ratan Singh; A. R. Sharma; S. K. Dhyani; et al.

11
claims
14
verbatim quotes
23
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted at Selakui, Dehradun during 2001–04 to study the effect of tillage (conventional and minimum) and mulching practices (no mulching and live mulching) under artificially created varying land slopes (0.5, 2.5, 4.5 and 9.5%) on soil-moisture conservation, productivity and nutrient uptake in maize (Zea mays L.)–wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend Fiori & Paol.) cropping system. Sunnhemp (Crotalaria juncea L.) intercropped with maize gave 0.87–1.09 tonnes biomass (dry weight) and accumulated 24.8–31.4 kg N/ha at 30 days of growth when it was mulched. Biomass and N accumulation generally decreased with increasing land slope and under minimum tillage. Maize performed better on moderate slopes (2.5–4.5%) than on the relatively flat (0.5%) and highly sloping land (9.5%). However, the yield of wheat decreased linearly and significantly with increasing slope due to less conservation of soil moisture on sloping lands during the previous rainy season. Conventional tillage gave significantly higher productivity of both maize and wheat than the minimum tillage. Intercropping of maize with sunnhemp and spreading the cut biomass as mulch at 30 days (live mulching) improved soil moisture conservation at maize harvest (+1.63 to 1.94%), and yield of maize (12.0%) as well as of following wheat (13.8%) compared with the no mulching.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 11

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mulched sunnhemp intercropped with maize gave 0.87–1.09 tonnes dry biomass.

Taxon
SunnhempCrotalaria junceae0
Interactor
maizeZea mayse0other
Outcome
biomass (dry weight)e0
Value
0.87–1.09 tonnese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Crotalaria juncea
Crotalaria juncea · TaxonA16898 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Zea mays
Zea mays · InteractorAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Sunnhemp (Crotalaria juncea L.) intercropped with maize gave 0.87–1.09 tonnes biomass (dry weight)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 407–505 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mulched sunnhemp accumulated 24.8–31.4 kg N/ha after 30 days.

Taxon
SunnhempCrotalaria junceae1
Outcome
Ne0
Value
24.8–31.4 kg N/hae0
Qualifier
30 days of growthe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Crotalaria juncea
Crotalaria juncea · TaxonA16898 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“accumulated 24.8–31.4 kg N/ha at 30 days of growth when it was mulched”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 510–580 · show in text ↑
e1

“Sunnhemp”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 407–415 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biomass decreased with increasing land slope and minimum tillage.

Taxon
SunnhempCrotalaria junceae1
Treatment
minimum tillagee0
Outcome
Biomasse0
Direction
decreasede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Crotalaria juncea
Crotalaria juncea · TaxonA16898 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Biomass and N accumulation generally decreased with increasing land slope and under minimum tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 582–681 · show in text ↑
e1

“Sunnhemp”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 407–415 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

N accumulation decreased with increasing land slope and minimum tillage.

Taxon
SunnhempCrotalaria junceae1
Treatment
minimum tillagee0
Outcome
N accumulatione0
Direction
decreasede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Crotalaria juncea
Crotalaria juncea · TaxonA16898 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Biomass and N accumulation generally decreased with increasing land slope and under minimum tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 582–681 · show in text ↑
e1

“Sunnhemp”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 407–415 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Maize performed better on moderate than flat or steep slopes.

Taxon
MaizeZea mayse0
Outcome
performed bettere0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
relatively flat (0.5%) and highly sloping land (9.5%)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Maize performed better on moderate slopes (2.5–4.5%) than on the relatively flat (0.5%) and highly sloping land (9.5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 683–801 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield decreased significantly as slope increased.

Outcome
yielde0
Direction
decreasede0
Setting
increasing slopee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the yield of wheat decreased linearly and significantly with increasing slope”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 812–889 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage increased maize productivity compared with minimum tillage.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
Conventional tillagee0
Outcome
productivitye0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
minimum tillagee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Conventional tillage gave significantly higher productivity of both maize and wheat than the minimum tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 983–1091 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional tillage increased wheat productivity compared with minimum tillage.

Treatment
Conventional tillagee0
Outcome
productivitye0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
minimum tillagee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Conventional tillage gave significantly higher productivity of both maize and wheat than the minimum tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 983–1091 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Live mulching improved soil moisture conservation by 1.63 to 1.94%.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
live mulchinge0
Outcome
soil moisture conservatione0
Direction
improvede0
Value
+1.63 to 1.94%e0
Comparator
no mulchinge0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“live mulching) improved soil moisture conservation at maize harvest (+1.63 to 1.94%), and yield of maize (12.0%) as well as of following wheat (13.8%) compared with the no mulching”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1361 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Live mulching improved maize yield by 12.0%.

Taxon
maizeZea mayse0
Treatment
live mulchinge0
Outcome
yield of maizee0
Direction
improvede0
Value
12.0%e0
Comparator
no mulchinge0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Zea mays
Zea mays · TaxonAkwugo · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“live mulching) improved soil moisture conservation at maize harvest (+1.63 to 1.94%), and yield of maize (12.0%) as well as of following wheat (13.8%) compared with the no mulching”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1361 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Live mulching improved following wheat yield by 13.8%.

Treatment
live mulchinge0
Outcome
yield of maize (12.0%) as well as of following wheate0
Direction
improvede0
Value
13.8%e0
Comparator
no mulchinge0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“live mulching) improved soil moisture conservation at maize harvest (+1.63 to 1.94%), and yield of maize (12.0%) as well as of following wheat (13.8%) compared with the no mulching”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1181–1361 · show in text ↑

mulching · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

112 papers: 97 positive, 15 negative or no effect

96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

108 papers more in this group

See all 112 papers →

mulching · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

149 papers: 137 positive, 12 negative or no effect

136 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

145 papers more in this group

See all 149 papers →

mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

364 papers: 330 positive, 34 negative or no effect

329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative
    Without nitrogen in the wet year, mulched plots yielded much less.

    Effect of a Killed Sod Mulch on Nitrate Movement and Corn Yield1 · 1973 · compared with conventionally‐tilled no nitrogen treatment

    Opposite direction

360 papers more in this group

See all 364 papers →

tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

1,099 papers: 812 positive, 287 negative or no effect

811 papers in the same direction as this paper · 230 in the opposite direction · 57 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

1,095 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 papers →

tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

1,414 papers: 1,116 positive, 298 negative or no effect

1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

1,410 papers more in this group

See all 1,414 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.