Intervention effectmodel-written summary

The benefit-cost (B:C) ratio was highest (4.6) when irrigation at 1.0 PEF was combined with 75% RDF fertigation.

A claim from Optimization nutrient levels and sources of nutrients for sustainable sugarcane initiative under sub surface drip fertigation system · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The benefit-cost (B:C) ratio was highest (4.6) when irrigation at 1.0 PEF was combined with 75% RDF fertigation.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
irrigation at 1.0 PEF and fertigation of 75 % RDFe7
Outcome
B: C ratioe7
Direction
higheste7
Value
4.6e7

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“Sugarcane being a giant crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–28
e7

“The highest gross income, net return and B: C ratio (4.6) was registered when irrigation at 1.0 PEF and fertigation of 75 % RDF”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2299–2426

Title

Optimization nutrient levels and sources of nutrients for sustainable sugarcane initiative under sub surface drip fertigation system

N.K. SATHYAMOORTHY; A. GURUSAMY; T. RAGAVAN; et al. AGRICULTURE UPDATE 2017. doi:10.15740/has/au/12.techsear(2)2017/370-374

Other claims from this paper (10)

Record rev-05eebcdf0d71ae7a2a94c66ed4a4c1ca6603382a9beeee80503fe08476f1dbb0 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 11 in the model’s answer

irrigation · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

142 papers: 129 positive, 13 negative or no effect

128 papers in the same direction as this claim · 9 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect
  4. negative
  5. negative
  6. negative
  7. negative
  8. negative

133 papers more in this group

See all 142 papers →

fertilization · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

346 papers: 312 positive, 34 negative or no effect

311 papers in the same direction as this claim · 28 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative
  4. no effect
  5. no effect
  6. no effect
  7. no effect
  8. negative

337 papers more in this group

See all 346 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.