Abstract
In sub-humid regions, declining maize (Zea mays L.) yield is majorly attributed to unreliable rainfall and high evapotranspiration demand during critical growth stages. However, there are limited farm technologies for conserving soil water and increasing water use efficiency (WUE) in rainfed production systems amidst a changing climate. This study aimed at assessing the performance of different climate smart agriculture (CSA) practices, such as mulching and permanent planting basins (PPB), on maize growth, yield, water use efficiency and soil moisture storage. Field experiments involving mulches of 2 cm (M_2 cm), 4 cm (M_4 cm) and 6 cm (M_6 cm) thickness, permanent planting basins of 20 cm (PPB_20 cm) and 30 cm (PPB_30 cm) depths and the control/or conventional treatments were conducted for three maize growing seasons in the sub-humid climate of Western Uganda. Results indicate that maize biomass significantly increased under the tested CSA practices in the study area. Use of permanent planting basins relatively increased maize grain yield (11–66%) and water use efficiency (33–94%) compared to the conventional practice. Additionally, plots treated with mulch achieved an increase in grain yield (18–65%) and WUE (28–85%) relative to the control. Soil amendment with M_4 cm and M_6 cm significantly increased soil moisture storage compared to permanent planting basins and the conventional practice. Overall, the results highlight the positive impact of CSA practices on improving maize yield and water use efficiency in rainfed agriculture production systems which dominate the sub-humid regions.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Climate-smart practices significantly increased maize biomass.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize biomass significantly increased under the tested CSA practices in the study area”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Planting basins increased maize grain yield by 11–66% over conventional practice.
- Treatment
- permanent planting basinse0
- Outcome
- maize grain yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 11–66%e0
- Comparator
- conventional practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Use of permanent planting basins relatively increased maize grain yield (11–66%) and water use efficiency (33–94%) compared to the conventional practice.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Planting basins increased water use efficiency by 33–94% over conventional practice.
- Treatment
- permanent planting basinse0
- Outcome
- water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 33–94%e0
- Comparator
- conventional practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Use of permanent planting basins relatively increased maize grain yield (11–66%) and water use efficiency (33–94%) compared to the conventional practice.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch increased grain yield by 18–65% relative to control.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plots treated with mulch achieved an increase in grain yield (18–65%) and WUE (28–85%) relative to the control”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulch increased WUE by 28–85% relative to control.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plots treated with mulch achieved an increase in grain yield (18–65%) and WUE (28–85%) relative to the control”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 4-cm mulch significantly increased soil moisture relative to basins and conventional practice.
- Treatment
- M_4 cme0
- Outcome
- soil moisture storagee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- permanent planting basins and the conventional practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil amendment with M_4 cm and M_6 cm significantly increased soil moisture storage compared to permanent planting basins and the conventional practice.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The 6-cm mulch significantly increased soil moisture relative to basins and conventional practice.
- Treatment
- M_6 cme0
- Outcome
- soil moisture storagee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- permanent planting basins and the conventional practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil amendment with M_4 cm and M_6 cm significantly increased soil moisture storage compared to permanent planting basins and the conventional practice.”
t0“Maize (Zea mays L.)”
The same questions in other papers
climate site · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 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
- no effect
- positive
- positive
112 papers more in this group
See all 116 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
- positive
- positive
- positive
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 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.