Abstract
Maize-soybean intercropping systems as a conservation farming practice are receiving increased focus from the scientific community. This is because of the advantages of intercropping, especially nutrient benefits through cereal-legume interactions, alternative sustainable methods to manage biotic stress (pests, diseases, weeds), and crop failure risk management due to erratic weather. In addition, smallholders in developing countries commonly use intercropping to produce crops. In Uganda, 40% of smallholder farmers are practicing intercropping yet no adequate location-specific information is available to inform their practice. Farmers who adopted conservation farming practices did not mulch their maize due to drudgery associated with collecting mulch. This study evaluated the effect of two tillage methods (T1 = Conventional tillage using ox drawn mould board plough, T2 = Minimum tillage using ox drawn ripper) and five soil cover practices (SC1 = Mulched Maize, SC2 = Control no mulch, SC3 = Two rows of soybean in between one row of maize, SC4 = One row of soybean in between one row of maize, SC5 = Sole soybean) on maize and soybean yield performance. The trials were established for 4 rainy seasons on a sandy loam ferrosol at National Agricultural Research Organization Institute in Lira, Uganda. Soil cover practice had a significant effect on maize and soybean crop Yield. Mulching significantly increased maize yield and LAI. The LER for both intercropping partterns were above 1.2. Tillage methods were not significantly different in determining crop performance. The practice of minimum tillage should also be adopted because it enhances the positive effects of soil cover (intercropping). We recommend farmers to adopt the intercropping pattern of one row of soybean in between maize row spaced at 75 × 30 cm for better LER, and crop performance. This intercropping pattern maximizes on available resources to deliver better output in conservation farming. Maize crop generally performed better during first season as compared to second season. We recommend farmers to utilize the first rains as the main maize production season.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Soil cover significantly affected maize yield.
Zea maysNot reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil cover practice had a significant effect on maize and soybean crop Yield.”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil cover significantly affected soybean yield.
- Taxon
- soybean
Glycine maxe0 - Treatment
- Soil cover practicee0
- Outcome
- soybean crop Yielde0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil cover practice had a significant effect on maize and soybean crop Yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulching significantly increased maize yield and LAI.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mulching significantly increased maize yield and LAI.”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
Claim · model-written summary
Both intercropping patterns had land equivalent ratio above 1.2.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The LER for both intercropping partterns were above 1.2.”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage methods did not significantly differ for crop performance.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Tillage methods were not significantly different in determining crop performance.”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
Claim · model-written summary
Minimum tillage should be adopted because it enhances soil-cover effects.
- Outcome
- minimum tillage should also be adoptede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The practice of minimum tillage should also be adopted because it enhances the positive effects of soil cover (intercropping).”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
Claim · model-written summary
Farmers are recommended to intercrop one soybean row between maize rows at 75 × 30 cm.
- Outcome
- intercropping pattern of one row of soybean in between maize row spaced at 75 × 30 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“We recommend farmers to adopt the intercropping pattern of one row of soybean in between maize row spaced at 75 × 30 cm for better LER, and crop performance.”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize performed better in the first season.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize crop generally performed better during first season as compared to second season.”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
Claim · model-written summary
Farmers are recommended to use first rains as the main maize production season.
- Outcome
- utilize the first rains as the main maize production seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“We recommend farmers to utilize the first rains as the main maize production season.”
t0“Maize and Soybean Yield Performance”
The same questions in other 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
- negative
- no effect
- negative
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 papers →tillage · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
286 papers in the same direction as this paper · 812 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 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.