Table 2 Interaction effect of the CA-based CEP and nutrient management on the system productivity (± S.D.) in terms of MGEY during the 7 years of the study in the maize–chickpea rotation.

From: Long-term conservation agriculture and best nutrient management improves productivity and profitability coupled with soil properties of a maize–chickpea rotation

Treatment

Maize grain equivalent yield (MGEY, Mg ha−1)

2013–2014

2014–2015

2015–2016

2016–2017

2017–2018

2018–2019

2019–2020

ZTFB–FFP

6.35cde ± 0.31

5.39c ± 0.12

3.79d ± 0.66

6.33bcde ± 1.18

9.18cd ± 1.23

9.5b ± 0.52

8.51c ± 0.45

ZTFB–RDF

6.76cd ± 0.15

6.26abc ± 0.69

5.48abc ± 0.36

7.84ab ± 0.80

11.5ab ± 1.54

10.9a ± 0.40

11.2bc ± 0.88

ZTFB–NE

7.54bc ± 0.37

6.82ab ± 1.10

6.08ab ± 0.60

8.83a ± 0.85

12.3a ± 0.69

11.1a ± 0.41

14.4a ± 4.59

PNB–FFP

5.82de ± 0.07

5.49bc ± 0.30

4.56bcd ± 0.71

5.79de ± 1.02

10.4bc ± 1.21

10.9a ± 0.77

10.1bc ± 0.84

PNB–RDF

9.07ab ± 0.12

6.63abc ± 0.67

6.72a ± 0.87

6.93bcd ± 1.67

11.8ab ± 1.26

11.3a ± 0.43

11.1bc ± 0.51

PNB–NE

9.54a ± 0.77

7.48a ± 0.34

6.79a ± 0.70

7.81abc ± 0.91

11.5ab ± 1.27

11.6a ± 0.72

12.3ab ± 0.40

CT–FFP

4.96e ± 0.96

5.77bc ± 1.64

4.48cd ± 0.84

5.13e ± 0.61

9.12cd ± 1.43

7.87c ± 0.29

9.16c ± 0.5

CT–RDF

7.93abc ± 0.75

6.01bc ± 0.13

5.81abc ± 1.07

6.11cde ± 0.70

9.64cd ± 1.23

8.27c ± 0.09

8.73c ± 1.07

CT–NE

7.48bc ± 0.19

6.29abc ± 0.29

5.82abc ± 0.68

6.84bcde ± 0.49

8.34d ± 0.81

7.89c ± 0.37

9.16c ± 0.49

  1. Means followed by a similar uppercase letter within a column is not significantly different (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s HSD test.