Paper · 2018 · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)

AnÁlise econÔmica do milho em sucessÃo a diferentes adubos verdes, Manejos do solo e doses de nitrogÊnio

Kappes, Claudinei; Gitti, Douglas Castilho; Orivaldo, A. R.F.; et al.

4
claims
6
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-sa

Abstract

Technologies that increase crop yields are possible when providing profitability to the producer. The objective of this study was to evaluate production costs and profitability of maize in production systems in Cerrado. The study was conducted in Selvíria (Mato Grosso do Sul State), Brazil, in the years 2009/10 and 2010/11. The experiment was arranged in randomized blocks with four replications in factorial and mixed with tracks. We established 36 treatments, three green manures (Pennisetum glaucum, Crotalaria juncea and intercropping Pennisetum glaucum + Crotalaria juncea), three soil management practices (no-tillage system, heavy disking + levelling disking and chisel plow + levelling disking) and four doses of N (0, 60, 90 and 120 kg ha-1). For economic analysis were estimated operational cost, the gross revenue obtained by the product of the productivity of the treatments and the value of corn (R$ 0,417 kg or R$ 25,00 sc-1) and the ratio revenue/cost of treatment. Whereas higher values (revenue/cost > 1) and lower (revenue/cost ratio < 1) as a parameter in the analysis of profitability, it can be concluded that corn under no-tillage had the highest profitability in succession to Pennisetum glaucum growing profitability with increasing N rates, in succession to Crotalaria juncea and in the absence of nitrogen application on the coverage achieved higher profitability compared to other treatments and in succession to the consortium Pennisetum glaucum + Crotalaria juncea doses of N was between 50 and 55 kg ha-1 offer greater profitability to the cultivation of corn.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

No-tillage maize after Pennisetum glaucum had the highest profitability.

Treatment
no-tillagee0
Outcome
profitabilitye0
Direction
higheste0
Qualifier
in succession to Pennisetum glaucume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“corn under no-tillage had the highest profitability in succession to Pennisetum glaucum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1220 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Profitability after Pennisetum glaucum increased with nitrogen rates.

Treatment
increasing N ratese0
Outcome
profitabilitye0
Direction
growinge0

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

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in succession to Pennisetum glaucum growing profitability with increasing N rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1185–1266 · show in text ↑
e1

“corn under no-tillage had the highest profitability in succession to Pennisetum glaucum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Maize after Crotalaria juncea without nitrogen application had higher profitability than other treatments.

Treatment
in the absence of nitrogen applicatione0
Outcome
profitabilitye0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
in succession to Crotalaria junceae0
Comparator
other treatmentse0

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

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in succession to Crotalaria juncea and in the absence of nitrogen application on the coverage achieved higher profitability compared to other treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1268–1420 · show in text ↑
e1

“corn under no-tillage had the highest profitability in succession to Pennisetum glaucum”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1220 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

After the Pennisetum glaucum and Crotalaria juncea mixture, nitrogen doses between 50 and 55 kg ha-1 gave greater maize profitability.

Treatment
doses of N was between 50 and 55 kg ha-1e0
Outcome
profitabilitye0
Direction
greatere0
Qualifier
in succession to the consortium Pennisetum glaucum + Crotalaria junceae0

Not reportedComparator

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

Zea mays subsp. mays
Zea mays subsp. mays · TaxonDominicus Johannes Bergsma · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in succession to the consortium Pennisetum glaucum + Crotalaria juncea doses of N was between 50 and 55 kg ha-1 offer greater profitability to the cultivation of corn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1425–1591 · show in text ↑

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. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

1,095 papers more in this group

See all 1,099 papers →

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

2,185 papers: 1,906 positive, 279 negative or no effect

278 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,906 in the opposite direction

This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

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.