Claim · model-written summary
T3 had field capacity of 0.017 ha/h.
Not reportedTaxonMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingQualifier
Verbatim
e0“lowest values of 0.017 and 0.012 ha/h were obtained with T3 and T2”
e1“effective field capacity of 0.064 ha/h was measured with T4 and the corresponding lowest values of 0.017 and 0.012 ha/h were obtained with T3 and T2”
Title
Evaluation of Different Mechanical Weed Control Methods in Rice Field
D K Mohanty; J Bhuyan Journal of Krishi Vigyan 2020. doi:10.5958/2349-4433.2020.00024.0
Other claims from this paper (14)
- Method / resource T4 had the highest mechanical weeding efficiency of 88.62%.
- Method / resource T2 had the lowest mechanical weeding efficiency of 78.67%.
- Intervention effect T4 damaged 3.78% of plants versus 0.11% with hand weeding.
- Intervention effect T2 damaged 2.83% of plants versus 0.11% with hand weeding.
- Intervention effect T3 damaged 1.76% of plants versus 0.11% with hand weeding.
- Method / resource T4 had the highest field capacity at 0.064 ha/h.
- Method / resource T2 had field capacity of 0.012 ha/h.
- Intervention effect T2 reduced weeding cost by 34.9% relative to hand weeding.
- Intervention effect T3 reduced weeding cost by 53.9% relative to hand weeding.
- Intervention effect T4 reduced weeding cost by 49.65% relative to hand weeding.
- Intervention effect T4 produced the highest rice grain yield at 43.6 q/ha.
- Intervention effect T3 rice grain yield was 37.5q/ha.
- Intervention effect T2 rice grain yield was 36.75q/ha.
- Intervention effect Hand weeding rice grain yield was 34.04 q/ha.