Abstract
Despite of the fact, that irrigation scheduling is important tools for decision making process but only very few farmers understand and not yet utilized by the majority of farmers. Furthermore, limited irrigation scheduling information are utilized by farm managers and extensionists. A regulated deficit irrigation experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of different irrigation depths on yield of Maize crop by using pan evaporation method. Five irrigation treatments 0.50 Epan (T1), 0.75 Epan (T2), 1.00 Epan (T3), 1.25 Epan (T4) and one control treatment i.e. farmers practice (T0) with three replicates by using randomized complete block design were tested. The total irrigation depth applied to maize was 278, 132, 197, 263 and 328 mm for T0, T1, T2, T3 and T4 treatments respectively. Only three number of irrigation were applied due to the occurrence of heavy rainfall during the study period. The average actual MAD before first, second and third irrigation ranged between 0.24-0.44, 0.34-0.66 and 0.30-0.54 respectively. The variation in MAD was due to non-uniform frequency of irrigation. The average application efficiency was between 45-91, 37-46 and 43-75% during first, second and third irrigation respectively. The maize evapotranspiration (ETc) was 451 mm during the study period. Maximum yield of 2933 kg/ha was obtained when plots were irrigated according to 0.75 Epan. Statistical analysis showed that there was significant affect of irrigation depths on grain yield.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 0.75 Epan gave the maximum maize yield of 2933 kg/ha.
- Treatment
- irrigated according to 0.75 Epane1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- Maximume1
- Value
- 2933 kg/hae1
- Comparator
- farmers practice (T0)e2
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of different irrigation depths on yield of Maize crop”
e1“Maximum yield of 2933 kg/ha was obtained when plots were irrigated according to 0.75 Epan”
e2“one control treatment i.e. farmers practice (T0)”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation depth had a significant effect on maize grain yield.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of different irrigation depths on yield of Maize crop”
e3“Statistical analysis showed that there was significant affect of irrigation depths on grain yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize evapotranspiration over the study period was 451 mm.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of different irrigation depths on yield of Maize crop”
e4“The maize evapotranspiration (ETc) was 451 mm during the study period”
Claim · model-written summary
Average irrigation application efficiency was 45-91, 37-46 and 43-75% at the first, second and third irrigation.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of different irrigation depths on yield of Maize crop”
e5“The average application efficiency was between 45-91, 37-46 and 43-75% during first, second and third irrigation respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Average actual MAD before the first, second and third irrigation ranged 0.24-0.44, 0.34-0.66 and 0.30-0.54.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of different irrigation depths on yield of Maize crop”
e6“The average actual MAD before first, second and third irrigation ranged between 0.24-0.44, 0.34-0.66 and 0.30-0.54 respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The variation in MAD is attributed to non-uniform frequency of irrigation.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“effect of different irrigation depths on yield of Maize crop”
e7“The variation in MAD was due to non-uniform frequency of irrigation.”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
790 papers in the same direction as this paper · 209 in the opposite direction · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- positive
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 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.