Low External Input Technologies for Livelihood Improvement in Subsistence Agriculture
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Reduced tillage shows higher productivity impact with increased crop revenue of $US 106 per hectare without fertilizer compared to conventional tillage.
“Reduced tillage shows higher productivity impact with increased crop revenue of $US 106 per hectare without application of fertilizer when compared to conventional tillage. (32)”
From The era of sustainable agricultural development in Africa: Understanding the benefits and constraints (2018) · cites this paper as [32]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 257 · Cited by 57
- Authors
- Graves, A., Matthews, R., & Waldie, K.
- Affiliations
- Cranfield University (GB)
- University of Reading (GB)
- Venue
- Advances in Agronomy
- Publisher
- Elsevier
- Published
- 2004
- Pages
- 473-555
- ISSN
- 0065-2113 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1520728403
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 257
- Citations by year
- 2024: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 14.81
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Advances in agronomy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Agronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › General Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant and soil sciences
- Keywords
- low-input agriculture, subsistence farming, livelihood improvement, intercropping, alley cropping, cover crops, green manure, compost, livestock manure, biomass transfer, nitrogen fixation, nutrient cycling, soil regeneration, pesticide and fertilizer reduction, agroforestry, natural enemies of pests, food security
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
