Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Panchagavya treatment gave higher nitrogen uptake of 129.93 kg ha-1.

A claim from Impact of Organic Nutrient Management on Productivity, Nutrient Uptake and Economics of Finger millet in Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) – Finger Millet (Eleusine coracana L.) Cropping System · 2018

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Panchagavya treatment gave higher nitrogen uptake of 129.93 kg ha-1.

Taxon
Finger Millet (Eleusine coracana L.)Eleusine coracanat0
Treatment
EBDLM @ 50 kg N equivalent ha-1 + 3 sprays of panchagavya @ 3 %e0
Outcome
uptake of nitrogene0
Direction
significantly highere0
Value
129.93e0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“significantly higher uptake of nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium (129.93, 12.7 and 82.10 kg ha-1, respectively) was noticed with EBDLM @ 50 kg N equivalent ha-1 + 3 sprays of panchagavya @ 3 %”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 719–912
t0

“Finger Millet (Eleusine coracana L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 139–175

Title

Impact of Organic Nutrient Management on Productivity, Nutrient Uptake and Economics of Finger millet in Groundnut (Arachis hypogaea L.) – Finger Millet (Eleusine coracana L.) Cropping System

M.R. Ananda; Sharan appa; K.N. Kalyana Murthy International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 2018. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2018.711.115

Other claims from this paper (19)

Record rev-0e985ef4e52b7e0ea72d3bdd9d91c903e03481b1326a07d15aeea5585b0c778c · schema claims-v0.9 · position 6 in the model’s answer

application · nutrient: content · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 17 positive, 1 negative or no effect

17 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
  4. positive
  5. positive
  6. positive
  7. positive
  8. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 18 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.