Abstract
The field study was conducted to evaluate soil physical properties, root activity, crop yield, water use and water productivity under five tillage-residue management practices namely conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3). The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth. Similar trend was also observed in 15-30 cm soil depth. The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations. Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ. Similar trend was observed at all the soil depths up to 60 cm. The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65). Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Happy seeder (HS) gave significantly higher soil bulk density (1.42 Mg m-3) in the 0-15 cm layer.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- happy seeder (HS)e0
- Outcome
- soil bulk densitye1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 1.42e1
- Qualifier
- 0-15 cm soil depthe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
No-tillage without residue (RRZ) gave significantly higher soil bulk density (1.42 Mg m-3) in the 0-15 cm layer.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- no-tillage without residue (RRZ)e0
- Outcome
- soil bulk densitye1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 1.42e1
- Qualifier
- 0-15 cm soil depthe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional tillage (RRC) gave soil bulk density of 1.38 Mg m-3 in the 0-15 cm layer, below HS and RRZ but above SS and MMC.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- conventional tillage (RRC)e0
- Outcome
- soil bulk densitye1
- Direction
- higherinferrede1
- Value
- 1.38e1
- Qualifier
- 0-15 cm soil depthe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) gave soil bulk density of 1.35 Mg m-3 in the 0-15 cm layer, below RRC.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- residue incorporation with superseeder (SS)e0
- Outcome
- soil bulk densitye1
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 1.35e1
- Qualifier
- 0-15 cm soil depthe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil inversion with mould board plough (MMC) gave the least soil bulk density, 1.31 Mg m-3, in the 0-15 cm layer.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC)e0
- Outcome
- soil bulk densitye1
- Direction
- lowerinferrede1
- Value
- 1.31e1
- Qualifier
- 0-15 cm soil depthe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil organic carbon was highest under residue incorporation with superseeder (SS), at 5.34 g kg-1 in the surface layer.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- residue incorporation with superseeder (SS)e0
- Outcome
- soil organic carbon (SOC)e2
- Direction
- higheste2
- Value
- 5.34e2
- Qualifier
- at the surface layere2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil organic carbon was lowest under conventional tillage (RRC), at 4.61 g kg-1 in the surface layer.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- conventional tillage (RRC)e0
- Outcome
- soil organic carbon (SOC)e2
- Direction
- loweste2
- Value
- 4.61e2
- Qualifier
- at the surface layere2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil moisture storage to 90 cm was significantly higher under irrigation regime I1 (10.40 cm) than under I2, owing to more irrigations.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation regime IW/CPEe0
- Outcome
- moisture storagee2
- Direction
- highere2
- Value
- 10.40e2
- Qualifier
- up to 90 cm soil depthe2
- Comparator
- I2e2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat root mass density declined sharply with increasing soil depth.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- Root mass density (RMD)e3
- Direction
- declinede3
- Qualifier
- with increase in soil depthe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
In the 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum root mass density was found under soil inversion with mould board plough (MMC).
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC)e0
- Outcome
- RMDe3
- Direction
- maximume3
- Qualifier
- In 0-15 cm layere3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
In the 0-15 cm layer, mean minimum root mass density was found under no-tillage without residue (RRZ).
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- no-tillage without residue (RRZ)e0
- Outcome
- RMDe3
- Direction
- minimume3
- Qualifier
- In 0-15 cm layere3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat grain yield was maximum under irrigation regime I1 (5.56 t ha-1), followed by I2 and I3.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation regime IW/CPEe0
- Outcome
- wheat grain yielde4
- Direction
- maximume4
- Value
- 5.56e4
- Qualifier
- followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19)e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Water use efficiency was maximum under irrigation regime I3 (12.69 kg ha-1 mm-1), at par with I2.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation regime IW/CPEe0
- Outcome
- water use efficiencye4
- Direction
- maximume4
- Value
- 12.69e4
- Qualifier
- which was at par with I2 (12.66)e4
- Comparator
- I2e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Water use efficiency was minimum under irrigation regime I1 (11.65 kg ha-1 mm-1).
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation regime IW/CPEe0
- Outcome
- water use efficiencye4
- Direction
- minimume4
- Value
- 11.65e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
Claim · model-written summary
Happy seeder (HS) and residue incorporation with rotavator (SS) proved superior for sustainability, judged by soil properties, compared with other tillage practices.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS)e5
- Outcome
- sustainabilitye5
- Direction
- superiore5
- Qualifier
- quantified by the soil properties studiede5
- Comparator
- other tillage practicese5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“water productivity of wheat”
e0“conventional tillage (RRC), no-tillage without residue (RRZ), happy seeder (HS) with surface residue retention, residue incorporation with superseeder (SS) and soil inversion along with residue by mould board plough (MMC) and three irrigation regime IW/CPE (Irrigation water/Cumulative pan evaporation) ratio 0.9 (I1), 0.6 (I2) and 0.3 (I3)”
e1“The soil bulk density (Mg m-3) was found to be significantly higher under HS (1.42) and RRZ (1.42) followed by RRC (1.38), SS (1.35) and least under MMC (1.31) in 0-15 cm soil depth”
e2“The soil organic carbon (SOC) (g kg-1) was found to be highest under SS (5.34) and lowest under RRC (4.61) at the surface layer due to addition of organic matter in soil under SS. The moisture storage (cm) (up to 90 cm soil depth) was found significantly higher under I1 (10.40) as compared to I2 (9.48) and I3 (9.15) due to increase in number of irrigations”
e3“Root mass density (RMD) declined sharply with increase in soil depth. In 0-15 cm layer, mean maximum RMD was found under MMC and minimum under RRZ”
e4“The wheat grain yield (t ha-1) was observed maximum in I1 (5.56) followed by I2 (5.22) and I3 (5.19). The water use efficiency (kg ha-1 mm-1) was found maximum under I3 (12.69) which was at par with I2 (12.66) and minimum under I1 (11.65)”
e5“Happy seeder (HS) as well as the residue incorporation with rotavator (SS), in terms of sustainability, quantified by the soil properties studied, thus proved to be superior compared to other tillage practices”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
299 papers more in this group
See all 303 papers →irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
985 papers more in this group
See all 989 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.