Abstract
Maize ( Zea mays L.), the staple crop of Mexico, is often produced by smallholder farmers on sloping terrains. Historically, little agronomic research has been performed under the conditions of these farmers to support them in the sustainable intensification of their production systems. We set up trials at two locations in the state of Oaxaca to evaluate conservation agriculture and agroforestry in collaboration with local farmers. Crop diversification through crop rotations, multicropping, relay cropping or agroforestry increased system yields the most, by up to 1.4 t ha −1 in Teopoxco and 1.7 t ha −1 in Tamazulapam. Increased input use through increased fertilization or liming did not increase profitability enough to justify their use. Zero tillage and residue retention increased yields and reduced production costs. Conservation agriculture with agroforestry was a high-yielding, profitable system that also reduced farmers' risk by providing several harvests per year. The most profitable combinations of agroforestry and conservation agriculture could produce up to $4,854 USD ha −1 in Teopoxco and $2,143 USD ha −1 in Tamazulapam, while the control treatments in the same sites and years produced $175 USD ha −1 and $92 USD ha −1 respectively. In several years the main crop failed, while the trees were able to produce due to their different growing season compared to maize. Through adaptive investigation under farmers' conditions, sustainable intensification of traditional production system is possible with low-cost changes that are locally adapted and within farmers' possibilities.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Crop diversification raised system yield by up to 1.4 t ha −1 in Teopoxco.
- Treatment
- Crop diversification through crop rotations, multicropping, relay cropping or agroforestrye0
- Outcome
- system yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 1.4 t ha −1e0
- Setting
- Teopoxcoe0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Crop diversification through crop rotations, multicropping, relay cropping or agroforestry increased system yields the most, by up to 1.4 t ha −1 in Teopoxco and 1.7 t ha −1 in Tamazulapam”
t0“Maize ( Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Crop diversification raised system yield by up to 1.7 t ha −1 in Tamazulapam.
- Treatment
- Crop diversification through crop rotations, multicropping, relay cropping or agroforestrye0
- Outcome
- system yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 1.7 t ha −1e0
- Setting
- Tamazulapame0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Crop diversification through crop rotations, multicropping, relay cropping or agroforestry increased system yields the most, by up to 1.4 t ha −1 in Teopoxco and 1.7 t ha −1 in Tamazulapam”
t0“Maize ( Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
More fertilizer or liming did not improve profitability enough to justify use.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increased input use through increased fertilization or liming did not increase profitability enough to justify their use”
t0“Maize ( Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage and residue retention raised yield and lowered production costs.
- Treatment
- Zero tillage and residue retentione0
- Outcome
- yields and reduced production costse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Zero tillage and residue retention increased yields and reduced production costs”
t0“Maize ( Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Conservation agriculture with agroforestry was high yielding and profitable, with lower farmer risk.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Conservation agriculture with agroforestry was a high-yielding, profitable system that also reduced farmers' risk by providing several harvests per year”
t0“Maize ( Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The most profitable combination yielded up to $4,854 USD ha −1 at Teopoxco versus $175 USD ha −1 for controls.
- Treatment
- agroforestry and conservation agriculturee0
- Outcome
- producee0
- Value
- $4,854 USD ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- $175 USD ha −1e0
- Comparator
- control treatmentse0
- Setting
- Teopoxcoe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The most profitable combinations of agroforestry and conservation agriculture could produce up to $4,854 USD ha −1 in Teopoxco and $2,143 USD ha −1 in Tamazulapam, while the control treatments in the same sites and years produced $175 USD ha −1 and $92 USD ha −1 respectively”
t0“Maize ( Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The most profitable combination yielded up to $2,143 USD ha −1 at Tamazulapam versus $92 USD ha −1 for controls.
- Treatment
- agroforestry and conservation agriculturee0
- Outcome
- producee0
- Value
- $2,143 USD ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- $92 USD ha −1e0
- Comparator
- control treatmentse0
- Setting
- Tamazulapame0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The most profitable combinations of agroforestry and conservation agriculture could produce up to $4,854 USD ha −1 in Teopoxco and $2,143 USD ha −1 in Tamazulapam, while the control treatments in the same sites and years produced $175 USD ha −1 and $92 USD ha −1 respectively”
t0“Maize ( Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Trees produced in several years when the main crop failed.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In several years the main crop failed, while the trees were able to produce due to their different growing season compared to maize”
The same questions in other papers
lime · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 185 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
215 papers more in this group
See all 219 papers →rotation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
253 papers in the same direction as this paper · 52 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
318 papers more in this group
See all 322 papers →organic · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
369 papers more in this group
See all 373 papers →intercropping · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
612 papers in the same direction as this paper · 181 in the opposite direction · 40 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
830 papers more in this group
See all 834 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
- positive
- positive
- no effect
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
422 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3,485 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 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.