Evaluation of Tillage Practices for Maize (Zea mays) Grown on Different Land-Use Systems in Eastern Zambia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Improved fallows of <em>Sesbania sesban</em> (Sesbania) have been known to improve soil physical and chemical properties and increase crop yield compared to traditional fallows. However, the effects of soil tillage practices after improved fallows on soil properties, weeds, labour and subsequent maize crop have not been assessed in Southern Africa. This study aimed to evaluate how tillage practices affect yield of maize and affect soil properties after two years of fallow and subsequent cropping phase. In this study, done at sites in eastern Zambia, maize yield from a two-year planted Sesbania, natural fallow, continuously fertilized and unfertilized maize were compared under conventional, flat till and zero tillage practices. A split plot experiment, with improved fallow systems in the main plot and the tillage practice in the subplot, was established at the sites. The results showed that the increases in grain yield under conventional tillage over zero tillage practice were 17.8% and 28.2% during 2000/2001 and 2001/2002 seasons, respectively, at Msekera. At Chadiza, the increases in grain yield under conventional tillage over zero tillage were 66.3% and 327.4% during 2000/2001 and 2001/2002 seasons, respectively. Greater maize yields were achieved under Sesbania planted fallows compared to the natural fallow and maize monoculture without fertilizer. Overall, zero tillage practice resulted in lower maize grain yield, higher bulk density, reduced water intake, higher weed infestation and high labour demand during weeding compared to conventional tillage.</p>
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".