Abstract
Abstract Conservation agriculture (CA) systems are based upon minimal soil disturbance; crop residue retention and crop rotation and/or intercrop association are increasingly seen to recycle nutrients, increase yield and reduce production costs. This study examines the effects of CA practices on crop productivity, profitability and soil quality under the conditions encountered by smallholder farmers in two farming communities from 2005 to 2011 in Malawi, as part of the contribution to remedy a lack of supporting agronomic research for these relatively new systems. The drier agroenvironment of Lemu of Bazale Extension Planning Area (EPA) is characterized by sandy clay loam soils and lower rainfall. Here, CA showed positive benefits on maize yield after the first season of experimentation, with highest increases of 2.7 Mg ha −1 and 2.3 Mg ha −1 more yield in CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop, respectively, than the conventional tillage in the driest season of 2009/10. In the high rainfall environment of Zidyana EPA (characterized by sandy loam soils), substantial maize yield benefits resulted in the fifth season of experimentation. Farmers spent at most 50 days ha −1 (US$140) producing maize under CA systems compared with 62 days ha −1 (US$176) spent under conventional tillage practices. In Lemu, both CA systems resulted in gross margins three times higher than that of the conventional control plot, while in Zidyana, CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop resulted in 33 and 23% higher gross margins, respectively, than conventional tillage. In Zidyana, the earthworm population was highest (48 earthworms m −2 in the first 30 cm) in CA monocrop maize, followed by a CA maize–legume intercropping (40 earthworms) and lowest (nine earthworms) in conventionally tilled treatment. In both study locations CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop gave higher water infiltration than the conventional treatment. Improvements in crop productivity, overall economic gain and soil quality have made CA an attractive system for farmers in Malawi and other areas with similar conditions. However, for extensive adoption of CA by smallholder farmers, cultural beliefs that crop production is possible without the ubiquitous ridge and furrow system and residue burning for mice hunting have to be overcome.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-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 11
Claim · model-written summary
In Lemu, CA monocrop maize yielded 2.7 Mg ha −1 more than conventional tillage in 2009/10.
- Treatment
- CA monocrop maizee0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 2.7 Mg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
- Setting
- Lemue1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“highest increases of 2.7 Mg ha −1 and 2.3 Mg ha −1 more yield in CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop, respectively, than the conventional tillage in the driest season of 2009/10”
e1“The drier agroenvironment of Lemu of Bazale Extension Planning Area (EPA)”
Claim · model-written summary
In Lemu, CA maize–legume intercrop yielded 2.3 Mg ha −1 more than conventional tillage in 2009/10.
- Treatment
- CA maize–legume intercrope0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 2.3 Mg ha −1e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
- Setting
- Lemue1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“highest increases of 2.7 Mg ha −1 and 2.3 Mg ha −1 more yield in CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop, respectively, than the conventional tillage in the driest season of 2009/10”
e1“The drier agroenvironment of Lemu of Bazale Extension Planning Area (EPA)”
Claim · model-written summary
Zidyana had substantial maize yield benefits in the fifth season.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the high rainfall environment of Zidyana EPA (characterized by sandy loam soils), substantial maize yield benefits resulted in the fifth season of experimentation”
e1“Here, CA showed positive benefits on maize yield”
t0“substantial maize yield benefits”
Claim · model-written summary
CA maize production used at most 50 days per hectare versus 62 with conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- CA systemse0
- Outcome
- days ha −1e0
- Value
- 50 days ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- 62 days ha −1e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage practicese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Farmers spent at most 50 days ha −1 (US$140) producing maize under CA systems compared with 62 days ha −1 (US$176) spent under conventional tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
CA maize cost US$140 compared with US$176 under conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- CA systemse0
- Outcome
- US$140e0
- Value
- US$140e0
- Qualifier
- US$176e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillage practicese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Farmers spent at most 50 days ha −1 (US$140) producing maize under CA systems compared with 62 days ha −1 (US$176) spent under conventional tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Zidyana CA monocrop maize produced 33% higher gross margins than conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- CA monocrop maizee0
- Outcome
- gross marginse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 33e0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
- Setting
- Zidyanae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in Zidyana, CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop resulted in 33 and 23% higher gross margins, respectively, than conventional tillage”
e1“33 and 23% higher gross margins”
Claim · model-written summary
Zidyana CA maize–legume intercrop produced 23% higher gross margins than conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- CA maize–legume intercrope0
- Outcome
- gross marginse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 23%e1
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
- Setting
- Zidyanae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in Zidyana, CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop resulted in 33 and 23% higher gross margins, respectively, than conventional tillage”
e1“33 and 23% higher gross margins”
Claim · model-written summary
Zidyana CA monocrop maize had the highest earthworm population at 48 per square metre.
- Treatment
- CA monocrop maizee0
- Outcome
- earthworm populatione0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 48 earthworms m −2e0
- Setting
- Zidyanae1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the earthworm population was highest (48 earthworms m −2 in the first 30 cm) in CA monocrop maize”
e1“In Zidyana, the earthworm population was highest”
Claim · model-written summary
Zidyana CA maize–legume intercropping had 40 earthworms.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“followed by a CA maize–legume intercropping (40 earthworms)”
e1“In Zidyana, the earthworm population was highest (48 earthworms m −2 in the first 30 cm) in CA monocrop maize, followed by a CA maize–legume intercropping (40 earthworms)”
Claim · model-written summary
CA monocrop maize increased infiltration relative to conventional treatment at both sites.
- Treatment
- CA monocrop maizee0
- Outcome
- water infiltratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- conventional treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In both study locations CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop gave higher water infiltration than the conventional treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
CA maize–legume intercrop increased infiltration relative to conventional treatment at both sites.
- Treatment
- CA maize–legume intercrope0
- Outcome
- water infiltratione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- conventional treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In both study locations CA monocrop maize and CA maize–legume intercrop gave higher water infiltration than the conventional treatment”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · soil: biology · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- negative
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 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
- negative
- positive
- no effect
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
- no effect
- positive
- positive
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 papers →intercropping · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
25 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 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.