Abstract
The study was conducted at the research farm of Institute Of Agricultural Research And Training (I.A.R & T), Ibadan. Nigeria. The trash on slash and burn plots were burnt while trash on zero tillage and conventional tillage were removed. Only conventional tillage plot was ploughed and harrowed. The soils of the study site belong to Oxic Paleustalf and classifies locally as Iwo Series. Soil sample were collected at depth of 0.15cm with a core sampler and 15-30cm with soil auger on all the 12 plots before and after the experiment. Three tillage practices {Conventional Tillage (CT), zero tillage (ZT) and slash and burn (SB)} were evaluated in a split plot design of (2m x 2m size) of four replications. Soil organic carbon, total nitrogen, sodium, calcium, phosphorus, soil organic matter and soil pH were evaluated. Conventional Tillage resulted in compaction of soil and poor soil organic matter status. There were no significant difference in maize plant height and stem girth. In addition, no tillage resulted in greatest organic matter and lowest in maize stem girth, height and yield while CT and SB resulted in higher maize grain and stover yield and soil available phosphorus. SB was significantly higher in calcium, potassium, and exchangeable bases but decreases soil organic carbon. Therefore, for sustainable production in maize yield, ZT and CT is highly recommended over SB except for that, burning helps to release concluded mineral nutrients such as Mg, Ca, and available P.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage caused soil compaction and poor soil organic matter status.
Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e1“Conventional Tillage resulted in compaction of soil and poor soil organic matter status”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage practices did not significantly change maize plant height or stem girth.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Three tillage practices”
e2“There were no significant difference in maize plant height and stem girth”
Claim · model-written summary
No tillage gave the greatest soil organic matter.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e3“no tillage resulted in greatest organic matter and lowest in maize stem girth, height and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
No tillage gave the lowest maize stem girth, height and yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“no tillage resulted in greatest organic matter and lowest in maize stem girth, height and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
CT and SB gave higher maize grain and stover yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“CT and SB resulted in higher maize grain and stover yield and soil available phosphorus”
Claim · model-written summary
CT and SB gave higher soil available phosphorus.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e4“CT and SB resulted in higher maize grain and stover yield and soil available phosphorus”
Claim · model-written summary
SB gave significantly higher soil calcium, potassium and exchangeable bases.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e5“SB was significantly higher in calcium, potassium, and exchangeable bases but decreases soil organic carbon”
Claim · model-written summary
SB decreased soil organic carbon.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e5“SB was significantly higher in calcium, potassium, and exchangeable bases but decreases soil organic carbon”
Claim · model-written summary
Burning is associated with release of mineral nutrients such as Mg, Ca and available P.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e7“burning helps to release concluded mineral nutrients such as Mg, Ca, and available P”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage and conventional tillage are recommended over slash-and-burn for sustainable maize production.
- Outcome
- ZT and CTe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“ZT and CT is highly recommended over SB”
e7“for sustainable production in maize yield”
The same questions in other papers
fire · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →tillage · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
67 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
78 papers more in this group
See all 82 papers →tillage · soil: physics · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 124 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
148 papers more in this group
See all 152 papers →tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
86 papers in the same direction as this paper · 196 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
279 papers more in this group
See all 283 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
- negative
- no effect
1,095 papers more in this group
See all 1,099 papers →fire · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
fire · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.