Paper · 2012 · Agricultural Engineering Today

Comparative Performance of Zero-till drill, Seed drill and Broadcasting for sowing Green gram in Farmers’ Field

P. K. Rout; P L Pradhan; S. K. Nanda

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during Rabi season of 2010–11 by AICRP on FIM, CAET, OUAT, Bhubaneswar, in the farmer's field to conduct a comparative study of different sowing methods of green gram. The different sowing methods were broadcasting by the traditional farmer's practice, sowing by tractor drawn seed drill and by tractor drawn zero-till drill. All other practices remained constant. Though the yield of zero-till drill was 5.12% less than yield by seed drill, but the benefit cost ratio of zero-till drill was highest among all the three methods. It can save energy up to 1136 MJ per hectare required for land preparation.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zero-till drill yield was 5.12% lower than seed drill yield.

Treatment
zero-till drille0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
lesse0
Value
5.12%e0
Comparator
seed drille0

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the yield of zero-till drill was 5.12% less than yield by seed drill”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 405–473 · show in text ↑
t0

“Green gram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–93 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zero-till drill had the highest benefit cost ratio among three methods.

Treatment
zero-till drille0
Outcome
benefit cost ratioe0
Direction
higheste0

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the benefit cost ratio of zero-till drill was highest among all the three methods”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 479–560 · show in text ↑
t0

“Green gram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zero-till drill could save up to 1136 MJ per hectare of land preparation energy.

Outcome
energye0
Direction
savee0
Value
1136 MJ per hectaree0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“It can save energy up to 1136 MJ per hectare required for land preparation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 562–636 · show in text ↑
t0

“Green gram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–93 · show in text ↑

transplanting · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 8 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

tillage · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

81 papers: 67 positive, 14 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 67 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

77 papers more in this group

See all 81 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.