Abstract
Conventional tillage and crop establishment methods for the rice–wheat (RW) system are input intensive (water, labour and energy). About 24.5 million tonnes of rice residues are burnt every year on farms in north-western India before sowing of wheat, causing air pollution and soil health degradation. Therefore, alternative tillage, crop establishment and residue management practices are needed for long-term sustainability of the RW system. A 4-year field study evaluated four tillage and crop establishment methods in rice (in main plots) and three tillage and rice residue management methods in wheat (in subplots) for their effects on yield, soil fertility, and profitability of the RW system. Average rice yields were similar under conventional puddled transplanted rice (PTR) and conventional till dry seeder rice (CTDSR). Both of these treatments produced significantly greater yields (10–16%) compared with zero till DSR (ZTDSR) and ZT machine transplanted rice in non-puddled soil, respectively, regardless of tillage and straw management methods in the previous wheat crop. Wheat yields in ZT wheat (ZTW) with 100% surface retention of rice residue (+R) were significantly greater than conventional till without residue retention after 2 years of experimentation, and accompanied by significant increases in macro-nutrient (potassium) availability in soil. The ZTW−R (no residue) treatment produced 15% lower wheat yield than ZTW+R. System yield was highest in CTDSR-ZTW+R, which was 5% higher than the conventional practice PTR-CTW−R, resulting in Rs 17 000 ha−1 greater net returns.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
PTR and CTDSR had similar average rice yield.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativae0 - Treatment
- conventional puddled transplanted rice (PTR)e0
- Outcome
- Average rice yieldse0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- conventional till dry seeder rice (CTDSR)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Average rice yields were similar under conventional puddled transplanted rice (PTR) and conventional till dry seeder rice (CTDSR).”
Claim · model-written summary
PTR yielded 10–16% more rice than ZTDSR.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- conventional puddled transplanted rice (PTR)e1
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 10–16%e0
- Comparator
- zero till DSR (ZTDSR)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both of these treatments produced significantly greater yields (10–16%) compared with zero till DSR (ZTDSR) and ZT machine transplanted rice in non-puddled soil, respectively”
t0“rice–wheat system”
e1“conventional puddled transplanted rice (PTR)”
Claim · model-written summary
CTDSR yielded 10–16% more rice than ZT machine transplanting in non-puddled soil.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativat0
- Treatment
- CTDSRe1
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 10–16%e0
- Comparator
- ZT machine transplanted rice in non-puddled soile0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both of these treatments produced significantly greater yields (10–16%) compared with zero till DSR (ZTDSR) and ZT machine transplanted rice in non-puddled soil, respectively”
t0“rice–wheat system”
e1“conventional till dry seeder rice (CTDSR)”
Claim · model-written summary
ZTW with full surface rice residue retention yielded more wheat than conventional tillage without retention after two years.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- ZT wheat (ZTW) with 100% surface retention of rice residue (+R)e0
- Outcome
- Wheat yieldse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- after 2 years of experimentatione0
- Comparator
- conventional till without residue retentione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat yields in ZT wheat (ZTW) with 100% surface retention of rice residue (+R) were significantly greater than conventional till without residue retention after 2 years of experimentation”
Claim · model-written summary
ZTW with full residue retention increased soil potassium availability.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- ZT wheat (ZTW) with 100% surface retention of rice residue (+R)e0
- Outcome
- macro-nutrient (potassium) availability in soile0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Comparator
- conventional till without residue retentione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Wheat yields in ZT wheat (ZTW) with 100% surface retention of rice residue (+R) were significantly greater than conventional till without residue retention after 2 years of experimentation, and accompanied by significant increases in macro-nutrient (potassium) availability in soil.”
Claim · model-written summary
ZTW without residue yielded 15% less wheat than ZTW with residue.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- ZTW−R (no residue)e0
- Outcome
- wheat yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Comparator
- ZTW+Re0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The ZTW−R (no residue) treatment produced 15% lower wheat yield than ZTW+R.”
Claim · model-written summary
CTDSR-ZTW+R had the highest system yield, 5% above PTR-CTW−R.
- Taxon
- rice–wheatOryza sativaTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CTDSR-ZTW+Re0
- Outcome
- System yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 5%e0
- Comparator
- PTR-CTW−Re0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“System yield was highest in CTDSR-ZTW+R, which was 5% higher than the conventional practice PTR-CTW−R, resulting in Rs 17 000 ha−1 greater net returns.”
t0“rice–wheat system”
Claim · model-written summary
CTDSR-ZTW+R generated Rs 17 000 ha−1 higher net returns than PTR-CTW−R.
- Taxon
- rice–wheatOryza sativaTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- CTDSR-ZTW+Re0
- Outcome
- net returnse0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- Rs 17 000 ha−1e0
- Comparator
- PTR-CTW−Re0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“System yield was highest in CTDSR-ZTW+R, which was 5% higher than the conventional practice PTR-CTW−R, resulting in Rs 17 000 ha−1 greater net returns.”
t0“rice–wheat system”
The same questions in other papers
Oryza sativa · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
127 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- positive
150 papers more in this group
See all 154 papers →Oryza sativa · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →tillage · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
47 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
53 papers more in this group
See all 57 papers →tillage · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
586 papers in the same direction as this paper · 115 in the opposite direction · 27 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
725 papers more in this group
See all 729 papers →transplanting · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
921 papers in the same direction as this paper · 132 in the opposite direction · 24 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,074 papers more in this group
See all 1,078 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 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.