Abstract
The study was conducted in Northern Tanzania from the 2022–2023 cropping seasons to develop a cropping model that farmers can use to improve their lablab production. The field experiments were conducted at the Tanzania Agricultural Research Institute, Selian station and was laid down in a Split Plot Designs with main factor being tillage system and sub-factor being fertilizer type (Goat manure and Minjingu Nafaka Plus). The trials consisted of three treatments (goat manure, Minjingu Nafaka Plus and the control-no fertilizer) replicated thrice. There were significant differences (p=<0.001) among the number of pods per plant, plant height and lablab grain yield. The highest grain yield (3952 g and 3933 g) with net benefit of (1,290,210Tshs and 1,249,175Tshs) was recorded in a plot treated with (Minjingu Nafaka Plus) fertilizer in Conventional and Zero tillage system compared with (Goat manure) which had (3944 g and 3928 g) with net benefit of (1,306,710Tshs and 1,292,675Tshs) in Conventional and Zero tillage practices. Conclusively, the study revealed that there were high net benefits under zero tillage compared to conventional tillage based on input-output costs analysis at both TARI - Selian and Saweni sites. Zero tillage was more economically viable than conventional tillage practices as becomes more friendly for the resource-constrained farmers in increasing their potential yield.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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
Claim · model-written summary
Lablab pods per plant, plant height and grain yield differed significantly among the fertilizer and tillage treatments.
- Outcome
- number of pods per plant, plant height and lablab grain yielde0
- Qualifier
- p=<0.001e0
- Setting
- Tanzania Agricultural Research Institute, Selian statione6
LablabNot reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“for improved lablab growth and yield”
e0“There were significant differences (p=<0.001) among the number of pods per plant, plant height and lablab grain yield”
e6“The field experiments were conducted at the Tanzania Agricultural Research Institute, Selian station”
Claim · model-written summary
In conventional tillage, Minjingu Nafaka Plus gave the highest lablab grain yield, 3952 g, compared with goat manure at 3944 g.
- Treatment
- Minjingu Nafaka Pluse2
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- higheste1
- Value
- 3952 ge1
- Qualifier
- 3944 ge3
- Comparator
- Goat manuree3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“for improved lablab growth and yield”
e1“The highest grain yield (3952 g and 3933 g)”
e2“was recorded in a plot treated with (Minjingu Nafaka Plus) fertilizer in Conventional and Zero tillage system”
e3“compared with (Goat manure) which had (3944 g and 3928 g)”
Claim · model-written summary
In zero tillage, Minjingu Nafaka Plus gave the highest lablab grain yield, 3933 g, compared with goat manure at 3928 g.
- Treatment
- Minjingu Nafaka Pluse2
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- higheste1
- Value
- 3933 ge1
- Qualifier
- 3928 ge3
- Comparator
- Goat manuree3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“for improved lablab growth and yield”
e1“The highest grain yield (3952 g and 3933 g)”
e2“was recorded in a plot treated with (Minjingu Nafaka Plus) fertilizer in Conventional and Zero tillage system”
e3“compared with (Goat manure) which had (3944 g and 3928 g)”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage gave higher net benefits than conventional tillage in the input-output cost analysis.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“for improved lablab growth and yield”
e5“there were high net benefits under zero tillage compared to conventional tillage”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · LablabPositive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
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.