Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Combined consortia and foliar nutrients significantly increased boll number to 25.1 over other treatments.

A claim from Quality Parameters of Bt Cotton as Influenced by the Biofertilizer Consortia and Foliar Nutrition under Rainfed · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined consortia and foliar nutrients significantly increased boll number to 25.1 over other treatments.

Taxon
Bt Cottone1
Treatment
Consortia of microbes applied to soil + foliar application of 18:18:18 @ 1.5 per-cente0
Outcome
total number of bolls plant-1e0
Direction
highere0
Value
25.1e0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“Consortia of microbes applied to soil + foliar application of 18:18:18 @ 1.5 per-cent recorded significantly higher total number of bolls plant-1 (25.1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 319–471
e1

“Bt Cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 308–317

Title

Quality Parameters of Bt Cotton as Influenced by the Biofertilizer Consortia and Foliar Nutrition under Rainfed

Laxman, T. International Journal of Pure & Applied Bioscience 2017. doi:10.18782/2320-7051.5383

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-3878e4e7fcd0d5bbd56b9460ee563aa17565c0a3f777f6d1e031b558db4cb895 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

inoculation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

50 papers: 46 positive, 4 negative or no effect

45 papers in the same direction as this claim · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    Inoculated cotton had a 27% reduction in number of bolls per plant.

    Effect of Cotton Seedling Infection by Cotton-leaf Crumple Virus on Subsequent Growth and Yield · 1986

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Inoculated cotton had a 82% decrease in yield/plant.

    Effect of Cotton Leaf Mosaic Disease on Morphology, Yield and Fibre Characteristics of Upland Cotton in Pakistan · 2005

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    With seed inoculation with N-fixing bacteria, seed cotton yield per feddan was not significantly reduced when the mineral N rate was lowered to 45 kg N/feddan.

    EFFICIENCY OF SEED INOCULATION WITH N-FIXING BACTERIA IN DECREASING THE MINERAL N REQUIREMENTS FOR EARLY AND LATE SOWN COTTON PLANTINGS · 2004

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Reduced fertilizer dose with biofertilizer gave cotton yield levels at par with 100% recommended NPK.

    Evaluation of Efficacy of Azotobacter (AZOMAX) and VAM (ECOMAX-G) on Cotton Yield Attributing Characters · 2020 · compared with 100% recommended dose

    No difference from an alternative

  5. positive
    AMF inoculation increased cotton yield by 28.54% against non inoculated controls.

    Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF) enhanced the growth, yield, fiber quality and phosphorus regulation in upland cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) · 2020 · compared with non inoculated controls

    Same direction

  6. positive
    PGPR inoculation of cotton at 50 g per kg seed significantly increased seed cotton yield by 21% over controls.

    Response of cotton to plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) inoculation under different levels of nitrogen · 2007 · compared with their respective controls

    Same direction

  7. positive
    Microbial inoculants increased cotton yield by 3 to 23% compared with uninoculated controls.

    Microbial Inoculants with Multifaceted Traits Suppress Rhizoctonia Populations and Promote Plant Growth in Cotton · 2016 · compared with uninoculated controls

    Same direction

  8. positive
    HT 57 inoculant was identified as significant for boll number and boll weight per plant in cotton.

    Impact of the use of biofertilizers on cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) crop under irrigated agro-ecosystem · 2005

    Same direction

41 papers more in this group

See all 50 papers →

application · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

283 papers: 253 positive, 30 negative or no effect

252 papers in the same direction as this claim · 27 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
    Foliar methanol did not increase cotton yield at any location.

    Foliar Methanol Applications to Cotton in the Southeastern United States: Leaf Physiology, Growth, and Yield Components · 1995

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Fluazifop at four weeks gave cotton 93% of weed-free yield.

    Growth and Interaction of Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) by Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) · 1991 · compared with weed-free cotton

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Peak flowering spraying somewhat reduced weight of late opening bolls.

    Cotton Flowering and Fruiting Responses to Application Timing of Chemical Growth Retardants1 · 1975

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Foliar fertilizers produced no significant yield response.

    Effects of foliar fertilization of texas southern high plains cotton: Leaf phosphorus, potassium, zinc, iron, manganese, boron, calcium, and yield distribution · 1999

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    First-harvest lint yield was generally unaffected by foliar treatments.

    Influence of surfactants on potassium uptake and yield response of cotton to foliar potassium nitrate · 1995

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    Foliar fertilizers did not significantly affect lint or seed yield.

    Effects of Foliar Fertilization of Texas Southern High Plains Cotton: Leaf Nitrogen and Growth Parameters · 1998

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    A single 1 mL water spray reduced cotton seed set by 55%.

    Sprinkler‐Induced Flower Losses and Yield Reductions in Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) · 2003

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Lint yields were similar with early or early plus midseason glyphosate sprays.

    Timing of Glyphosate Application on Control of Silverleaf Nightshade and Glyphosate-Resistant Cotton Yield · 2006

    Opposite direction

274 papers more in this group

See all 283 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.