Abstract
A field study was carried out to determine the effect of tillage treatments on growth and yield of maize (Zea mays L.). The experiment was conducted in the autumn 2012 and was repeated in the spring 2013. Four tillage treatments included in the study were: conventional tillage (CT), minimum tillage (MT), zero tillage (ZT) and controlled traffic farming (CTF). Randomized complete block design was used to arrange treatments with three replications. The crop parameters studied were: seedling emergence, crop growth, root development and yield. The seed emergence of maize crop was greater under CT, followed by MT, CTF and ZT during both seasons. The plant height was highest under CT (181.5 and 181.6 cm), followed by MT (173.3 and 173.6 cm), CTF (172.8 and 173.0 cm) and ZT (166.6 and 167.1 cm). Leaves plant -1, grains cob-1, 1000-grain weight were maximum under CT, followed by MT, CTF, while minimum under ZT for both the seasons. The grain yield was maximum under CT (5359.3 and 5378.0 kg ha-1), followed by MT (4939 and 4963 kg ha-1), CTF (4907.2 and 4961.2 kg ha-1) and minimum under ZT (4321.4 and 4331.7 kg ha-1). However, there was no significant difference among MT and CT treatments. The similar trends were observed during both seasons. Root length, fresh and dry root weights were maximum under CT, followed by MT, CTF and ZT during autumn 2012 and similar trends were observed during spring 2013. However, non-significant difference was found between MT and CTF during both seasons. Significant effects of root development on plant height and grain yield were recorded. It is concluded that CT is suitable for maize cultivation in a clay loam soil.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Emergence ranked CT above MT, CTF and ZT in both seasons.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The seed emergence of maize crop was greater under CT, followed by MT, CTF and ZT during both seasons.”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Plant height was greatest under CT and least under ZT in both seasons.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The plant height was highest under CT (181.5 and 181.6 cm), followed by MT (173.3 and 173.6 cm), CTF (172.8 and 173.0 cm) and ZT (166.6 and 167.1 cm).”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaves per plant, grains per cob and grain weight ranked CT highest and ZT lowest.
- Treatment
- CTe0
- Outcome
- Leaves plant -1, grains cob-1, 1000-grain weighte0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Comparator
- ZTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves plant -1, grains cob-1, 1000-grain weight were maximum under CT, followed by MT, CTF, while minimum under ZT for both the seasons.”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield ranked CT highest, then MT and CTF, and ZT lowest.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The grain yield was maximum under CT (5359.3 and 5378.0 kg ha-1), followed by MT (4939 and 4963 kg ha-1), CTF (4907.2 and 4961.2 kg ha-1) and minimum under ZT (4321.4 and 4331.7 kg ha-1).”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
MT and CT did not differ significantly.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, there was no significant difference among MT and CT treatments.”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Root length and fresh and dry root weights ranked CT highest, followed by MT, CTF and ZT.
- Treatment
- CTe0
- Outcome
- Root length, fresh and dry root weightse0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Comparator
- MT, CTF and ZTe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Root length, fresh and dry root weights were maximum under CT, followed by MT, CTF and ZT during autumn 2012 and similar trends were observed during spring 2013.”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
MT and CTF did not differ significantly in root development.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, non-significant difference was found between MT and CTF during both seasons.”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
Root development significantly affected plant height and grain yield.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant effects of root development on plant height and grain yield were recorded.”
t0“MAIZE”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude CT is suitable for maize cultivation in clay loam soil.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“It is concluded that CT is suitable for maize cultivation in a clay loam soil.”
t0“MAIZE”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
195 papers in the same direction as this paper · 81 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- 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
- negative
- no effect
- negative
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.