Abstract
The effects of two tillage methods (zero tillage and conventional tillage), two residue managements (residue kept and residue removed) and two levels of cropping system (maize + soybean and sole maize) were studied over 3 years (2015-2017) at Dailekh district of Nepal. Arun-2 and Puja were the varieties of maize and soybean used respectively, followed by winter wheat. The results revealed that the maize + soybean system had significantly higher plant population and ear population (34.83 thousands ha-1 and 34.35 thousands ha-1, respectively), grains per row (37.1), ear length (16.6 cm) and 20.5% higher grain yield as compared to sole maize. The highest maize equivalent yield (7.92 t ha-1) was recorded in maize + soybean as compared to the lower grain yield equivalent (7.06 t ha-1) in sole maize. Zero tillage accounted relatively higher benefits (high net income and B:C ratio) as compared to conventional tillage. The residue kept plot resulted significantly higher B:C ratio (2.41) than the residue removed (2.11) and the maize + soybean recorded 82.5% greater B:C ratio compared to sole maize. Net annual income was significantly higher in zero tillage, residue kept and maize + soybean system (NRs. 223072.00, 222958.00 and 269016.00 ha-1 respectively). Such combinations are recommended for Dailekh district of Nepal to have profitable crop productivity. SAARC J. Agri., 17(1): 49-63 (2019)
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean produced a significantly higher plant population than sole maize.
- Treatment
- maize + soybeane0
- Outcome
- plant populatione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 34.83 thousands ha-1e0
- Comparator
- sole maizee1
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize + soybean system had significantly higher plant population and ear population (34.83 thousands ha-1 and 34.35 thousands ha-1, respectively)”
e1“as compared to sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean produced a significantly higher ear population than sole maize.
- Treatment
- maize + soybeane0
- Outcome
- ear populatione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 34.35 thousands ha-1e0
- Comparator
- sole maizee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize + soybean system had significantly higher plant population and ear population (34.83 thousands ha-1 and 34.35 thousands ha-1, respectively)”
e1“as compared to sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean increased grains per row relative to sole maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize + soybean system had significantly higher plant population and ear population (34.83 thousands ha-1 and 34.35 thousands ha-1, respectively), grains per row (37.1), ear length (16.6 cm) and 20.5% higher grain yield as compared to sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean increased ear length relative to sole maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize + soybean system had significantly higher plant population and ear population (34.83 thousands ha-1 and 34.35 thousands ha-1, respectively), grains per row (37.1), ear length (16.6 cm) and 20.5% higher grain yield as compared to sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean raised maize grain yield by 20.5% relative to sole maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize + soybean system had significantly higher plant population and ear population (34.83 thousands ha-1 and 34.35 thousands ha-1, respectively), grains per row (37.1), ear length (16.6 cm) and 20.5% higher grain yield as compared to sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean had higher maize equivalent yield than sole maize.
- Treatment
- maize + soybeane0
- Outcome
- maize equivalent yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 7.92 t ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 7.06 t ha-1e0
- Comparator
- sole maizee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“highest maize equivalent yield (7.92 t ha-1) was recorded in maize + soybean as compared to the lower grain yield equivalent (7.06 t ha-1) in sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage gave higher net income and benefit-cost ratio than conventional tillage.
- Treatment
- Zero tillagee0
- Outcome
- net income and B:C ratioe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Zero tillage accounted relatively higher benefits (high net income and B:C ratio) as compared to conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Keeping residue produced a significantly higher benefit-cost ratio than removing residue.
- Treatment
- residue kepte0
- Outcome
- B:C ratioe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 2.41e0
- Qualifier
- 2.11e0
- Comparator
- residue removede0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“residue kept plot resulted significantly higher B:C ratio (2.41) than the residue removed (2.11)”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean yielded an 82.5% greater benefit-cost ratio than sole maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize + soybean recorded 82.5% greater B:C ratio compared to sole maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage had significantly higher annual net income.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Net annual income was significantly higher in zero tillage, residue kept and maize + soybean system (NRs. 223072.00, 222958.00 and 269016.00 ha-1 respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
Residue retention had significantly higher annual net income.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Net annual income was significantly higher in zero tillage, residue kept and maize + soybean system (NRs. 223072.00, 222958.00 and 269016.00 ha-1 respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize plus soybean had significantly higher annual net income.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Net annual income was significantly higher in zero tillage, residue kept and maize + soybean system (NRs. 223072.00, 222958.00 and 269016.00 ha-1 respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend these practice combinations for profitable crop productivity in Dailekh.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Such combinations are recommended for Dailekh district of Nepal to have profitable crop productivity”
t0“maize-wheat”
The same questions in other papers
Glycine max · pest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Glycine max · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
154 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
176 papers more in this group
See all 180 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
- 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.