Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T07:16:56.973Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of No-tillage and Ploughing on Efficiency of Water Use in Maize and Cowpea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

R. Lal ,
P. R. Maurya  and
S. Osei-Yeboah
R. Lal
Affiliation:
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, PMB 5320, Ibadan, Nigeria
P. R. Maurya
Affiliation:
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, PMB 5320, Ibadan, Nigeria
S. Osei-Yeboah
Affiliation:
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, PMB 5320, Ibadan, Nigeria
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Water use efficiency of maize (Zea mays) and cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) was investigated, with and without tillage, under four irrigation frequencies in which 12 mm of water was applied at 2, 4, 8 and 12 day intervals, using a sprinkler system. Both maize and cowpea under no-tillage yielded more than with conventional ploughing. Water use efficiency of maize without tillage was 18·3, 17·5, 57·8 and 100% greater than with tillage at irrigation frequencies of 2, 4, 8 and 12 days respectively. Whereas the leaf water potential of cowpea was not affected by tillage, that of maize was generally higher for no-tillage compared with conventional ploughing.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , April 1978 , pp. 113 - 119
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1978

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Bond, J. S. & Willis, W. O. (1969). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 33, 445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bond, J. S. & Willis, W. O. (1970). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 34, 924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boyer, J. S. (1967). Plant Phys. 43, 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Roo, H. C. (1969). Agron. J. 61, 969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greb, B. W., Smika, D. E. & Black, A. L. (1970). J. Soil & Water Cons. 25, 58.Google Scholar
Greenland, D. J. (1975). Science 190, 841.Google Scholar
Hanks, R. J. & Woodruff, N. P. (1958). Soil Sci. 86, 160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanks, R. J., Bowers, S. A. & Bark, L. D. (1961). Soil Sci. 91, 233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lal, R. (1976). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 40, 762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lemon, E. R. (1956). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 20, 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, E. L. & Shrader, W. D. (1976). Agron. J. 68, 374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moody, J. E., Jones, J. N. Jr & Lillard, J. H. (1963). Soil Sci. Soc. Am. Proc. 27, 700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reicosky, D. C., Campbell, R. B. & Doty, C. W. (1976). Agron. J. 68, 499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanholtz, V. O. & Lillard, J. H. (1969). J. Soil & Water Cons. 24, 186.Google Scholar