Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Twice foliar potassium spraying gave a higher benefit-cost ratio of 2.24.

A claim from Yield and fiber qualities of hybrid cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) as influenced by soil and foliar application of potassium · 2011

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Twice foliar potassium spraying gave a higher benefit-cost ratio of 2.24.

Treatment
RDF + twice K foliar sprays each at early and peak boll formation stagee0
Outcome
B:C ratioe0
Direction
Highere0
Value
2.24e0
Comparator
application of N Pe0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Higher net returns (Rs.19,960/ha) and B:C ratio (2.24) were obtained with RDF + twice K foliar sprays each at early and peak boll formation stage as compared to the application of N P (Rs.13,960/ha) and RDF only (Rs.17,780/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 740–966
t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–42

Title

Yield and fiber qualities of hybrid cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) as influenced by soil and foliar application of potassium

Y. R. Aladakatti; S. S. Hallikeri; R. A. Nandagavi; et al. Journal of Farm Sciences 2011

Other claims from this paper (7)

Record rev-766d7df01fc098a866a82c21a0d32e016fc4edecf1d24594d881fa4670f45681 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 4 in the model’s answer

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. positive
    Four foliar B applications increased yields 8% over untreated check.

    Foliar Feeding of Cotton: Evaluating Potassium Sources, Potassium Solution Buffering, and Boron · 1998

    Same directionCited by this paper

  2. positive
    Soil potassium application improved cotton leaf number, area and dry weight.

    Influence of soil and foliar applications of potassium fertilization on growth, yield and fiber quality traits in two Gossypium barbadense L. varieties · 2013

    Same directionCites this paper

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

274 papers more in this group

See all 283 papers →

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

550 papers: 497 positive, 53 negative or no effect

496 papers in the same direction as this claim · 47 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
    Cotton yields did not respond to K fertilization above 160 kg K2O/ha.

    Effects of Rate and Time of Potassium Application on Cotton Yield and Quality in Turkey · 2002

    Opposite direction

  2. no effect
    Potassium fertilization did not affect cotton flower production at either planting date.

    Planting Date and Potassium Fertility Effects on Cotton Yield and Fiber Properties · 1998

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    At sympodia 5 through 10, fruiting site 1 boll production fell from 49% at zero nitrogen to 36% at 168 kg ha−1.

    Nitrogen Effects on Boll Production of Field‐Grown Cotton · 1993 · compared with 0 N rate

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Calcium or magnesium salts without liming did not raise low cotton yields.

    Long‐Term Liming Effects on Coastal Plain Soils and Crops · 2001

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Fertilizer N did not influence cotton yield after pea cover.

    Cotton Yield and Fiber Quality Response to Green Manures and Nitrogen · 1993

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    P fertilizer did not affect cotton lint yield at Lamesa in 2000.

    Influence of Landscape Position, Soil Series, and Phosphorus Fertilizer on Cotton Lint Yield · 2003

    Opposite direction

  7. no effect
    Potassium fertilization had no effect on cotton yield.

    Influence of Boron, Nitrogen, and Potassium on Yield, Nutrient Uptake, and Abnormalities of Cotton · 1969

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Phosphorus fertilizer had no effect on biomass production.

    Phosphorus Use-Efficiency by Cotton Grown in an Alkaline Soil as Determined Using32Phosphorus and33Phosphorus Radio-Isotopes · 2008

    Opposite direction

541 papers more in this group

See all 550 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.