Paper · 2008 · Tunnelling and Underground Space Technology

Sustainable Dryland Agriculture through Micro-Watershed Management

Murukannappa; Shankar

7
claims
7
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted to quantify the resource degradation under micro-watershed management at All India Co-ordinated Research Project for Dryland. Agriculture, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bangalore during 2000–2005. Proven technologies such as inter-terrace management practices with Vetiver (khus) and Pennisitum (Nase) grass as vegetative live bunds in combination of 0.52 sq. m cross-sectional contour bunds with open ends for in-situ moisture conservation were adopted. Micro-watersheds of about 0.6 to 0.7 hectare each having 2% land slope were delineated for constructing rain water harvesting structures like farm ponds of 180 cubic meter capacity. Different lining materials were used to control seepage loss from the stored water, which is used for providing life saving irrigation to highly remunerative vegetable crops. The highest runoff of 93.2 mm, which is 9.7% of the mean annual rainfall, occurred for the control plot (no inter-terrace management practices). The runoff produced in both the inter-terrace management practices were on par with each other (65.5 to 65.9 mm). The highest mean annual soil loss of 5.66 t/ha/year occurred under control plot and the lowest (3.151 t/ha/yr) was recorded under inter-terrace management with nase live barrier. The highest seepage loss of 8 – 10 cm per day from the stored water occurred in the unlined farm pond and the minimum seepage loss (1 – 2 cm/day) occurred in the pond lined with LOPE sheet over laid with soil + cement in the ratio of 8: 1. Incorporation of green bio-mass through horsegram (6 – 8 t/ha) enhanced the grain yield of finger millet by 8 – 10 per cent.

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 7

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Runoff was highest in the control plot without inter-terrace management (93.2 mm).

Outcome
runoffe1
Value
93.2 mme1
Qualifier
control plot (no inter-terrace management practices)e1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e1

“The highest runoff of 93.2 mm, which is 9.7% of the mean annual rainfall, occurred for the control plot (no inter-terrace management practices)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 858–1001 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Runoff under the two inter-terrace management practices was on par with each other (65.5 to 65.9 mm).

Outcome
runoffe1
Value
65.5 to 65.9 mme1
Qualifier
on par with each othere1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e1

“The runoff produced in both the inter-terrace management practices were on par with each other (65.5 to 65.9 mm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1003–1115 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean annual soil loss was highest under the control plot (5.66 t/ha/year).

Outcome
mean annual soil losse1
Value
5.66 t/ha/yeare1
Qualifier
control plote1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e1

“The highest mean annual soil loss of 5.66 t/ha/year occurred under control plot and the lowest (3.151 t/ha/yr) was recorded under inter-terrace management with nase live barrier”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1117–1294 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mean annual soil loss was lowest under inter-terrace management with nase live barrier (3.151 t/ha/yr).

Outcome
mean annual soil losse1
Value
3.151 t/ha/yre1
Qualifier
inter-terrace management with nase live barriere1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e1

“The highest mean annual soil loss of 5.66 t/ha/year occurred under control plot and the lowest (3.151 t/ha/yr) was recorded under inter-terrace management with nase live barrier”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1117–1294 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seepage loss from stored water was highest in the unlined farm pond (8 – 10 cm per day).

Outcome
seepage losse1
Value
8 – 10 cm per daye1
Qualifier
unlined farm ponde1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e1

“The highest seepage loss of 8 – 10 cm per day from the stored water occurred in the unlined farm pond”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1296–1397 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seepage loss was lowest in the pond lined with LOPE sheet over-laid with soil and cement (1 – 2 cm/day).

Outcome
seepage losse1
Value
1 – 2 cm/daye1
Qualifier
pond lined with LOPE sheet over laid with soil + cement in the ratio of 8: 1e1

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e1

“the minimum seepage loss (1 – 2 cm/day) occurred in the pond lined with LOPE sheet over laid with soil + cement in the ratio of 8: 1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1402–1534 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Incorporating horsegram green biomass (6 – 8 t/ha) enhanced finger millet grain yield by 8 – 10 per cent.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanae1
Treatment
Incorporation of green bio-mass through horsegram (6 – 8 t/ha)e1
Outcome
grain yielde1
Direction
enhancede1
Value
8 – 10 per cente1

Not reportedComparator

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Incorporation of green bio-mass through horsegram (6 – 8 t/ha) enhanced the grain yield of finger millet by 8 – 10 per cent”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1536–1659 · show in text ↑

Macrotyloma uniflorum · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.