Abstract
Field experiments were conducted at Cotton Research Station, Srivilliputtur,during 2017-18 and 2018-19 to study the effect of conservation agricultureand residue management practices on yield and economics of cotton(September to January) – maize (February to June) cropping system underirrigated conditions. The experiments were carried out in a RandomizedBlock Design with three replications. The treatments consisted of control(T1 - Conventional tillage + No residue management), Zero tillage (ZT) + Noresidue management (T2), ZT with 50 % residue management (T3), ZT with100 % residue management (T4), Permanent Bed System (PBS) + ZT + Noresidue management (T5), PBS + ZT + 50 % residue management (T6), PBS+ ZT + 100 % residue management (T7). The results revealed that thoughthe conventional tillage without residue incorporation recorded higher yieldsof cotton and maize in both the years of study, this was on par with thatof zero tillage with 100% and 50% residue management and significantlysuperior to other treatments. The conventional tillage without residueincorporation also registered the highest cotton equivalent yield (3584 and4046 kg.ha-1 during the first and second year of study, respectively) whichwere followed by ZT with 100 % residue management (3514 and 3924 kg/ha in the first and the second year) and ZT with 50 % residue management( 3481 and 3841 kg/ha in first and second year) and PBS + ZT + 100 %residue management (3413 and 3770 kg/ha in first and second year) inmaize - cotton cropping system. The labour requirement was minimized by 20laborers/crop/ha under ZT than conventional tillage. Adoption of ZT and PBSin the cotton – maize cropping system reduced the total cost of cultivationby Rs. 12,000/ha/year and Rs.15,500/ha/year, respectively. Though thehigher gross income was associated with conventional tillage without residueapplication, higher net income and BC ratio were registered by zero tillagewith residue application. Thus, it is concluded from the study that zero tillageunder cotton - maize cropping system was technically feasible, which wascomparable with conventional tillage without residue application on yieldbesides higher economic benefits and lesser labor use.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage without residue incorporation recorded higher yields of cotton and maize than the other treatments, on par with zero tillage with 100% and 50% residue management.
- Taxon
- cotton and maize
Gossypium hirsutum
Zea mayse1 - Treatment
- conventional tillage without residue incorporatione1
- Outcome
- yieldse1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- zero tillage with 100% and 50% residue managemente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“thoughthe conventional tillage without residueincorporation recorded higher yieldsof cotton and maize in both the years of study”
e2“this was on par with thatof zero tillage with 100% and 50% residue management”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage without residue incorporation gave the highest cotton equivalent yield, 3584 and 4046 kg/ha in the first and second year.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume3
- Treatment
- conventional tillage without residue incorporatione3
- Outcome
- cotton equivalent yielde3
- Direction
- higheste3
- Value
- 3584 and 4046 kg.ha-1e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“The conventional tillage without residueincorporation also registered the highest cotton equivalent yield (3584 and 4046 kg.ha-1 during the first and second year of study, respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage (ZT) minimized the labour requirement by 20 laborers per crop per ha compared with conventional tillage in the cotton-maize system.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- ZTe4
- Outcome
- labour requiremente4
- Direction
- minimizede4
- Value
- 20laborers/crop/hae4
- Comparator
- conventional tillagee4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton – maize cropping system”
e4“The labour requirement was minimized by 20laborers/crop/ha under ZT than conventional tillage”
Claim · model-written summary
Adoption of ZT reduced the total cost of cultivation by Rs. 12,000/ha/year in the cotton-maize system.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume5
- Treatment
- ZTe5
- Outcome
- total cost of cultivatione5
- Direction
- reducede5
- Value
- Rs. 12,000/ha/yeare5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“Adoption of ZT and PBSin the cotton – maize cropping system reduced the total cost of cultivationby Rs. 12,000/ha/year and Rs.15,500/ha/year, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Adoption of PBS reduced the total cost of cultivation by Rs. 15,500/ha/year in the cotton-maize system.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume5
- Treatment
- PBSe5
- Outcome
- total cost of cultivatione5
- Direction
- reducede5
- Value
- Rs.15,500/ha/yeare5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“Adoption of ZT and PBSin the cotton – maize cropping system reduced the total cost of cultivationby Rs. 12,000/ha/year and Rs.15,500/ha/year, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage without residue application gave a higher gross income.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- conventional tillage without residue applicatione6
- Outcome
- gross incomee6
- Direction
- highere6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton – maize cropping system”
e6“Though thehigher gross income was associated with conventional tillage without residueapplication”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage with residue application gave higher net income and BC ratio.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- zero tillage with residue applicatione7
- Outcome
- net income and BC ratioe7
- Direction
- highere7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton – maize cropping system”
e7“higher net income and BC ratio were registered by zero tillagewith residue application”
Claim · model-written summary
Zero tillage was technically feasible and comparable with conventional tillage without residue application on yield, with higher economic benefits and lesser labour use; the authors conclude it can be adopted.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume6
- Treatment
- zero tillagee6
- Outcome
- technically feasiblee6
- Comparator
- conventional tillage without residue applicatione6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“cotton – maize cropping system”
e6“zero tillageunder cotton - maize cropping system was technically feasible, which wascomparable with conventional tillage without residueapplication on yieldbesides higher economic benefits and lesser labor use”
The same questions in other papers
organic · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →tillage · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
112 papers in the same direction as this paper · 38 in the opposite direction · 8 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
155 papers more in this group
See all 159 papers →organic · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
369 papers more in this group
See all 373 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 →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.