Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Hand weeding at 30 days after sowing improved growth and yield of field pea and baby corn over a weedy check.

A claim from Growth, development and yield as affected by planting pattern and weed management in field pea and baby corn intercropping system · 2016

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Hand weeding at 30 days after sowing improved growth and yield of field pea and baby corn over a weedy check.

Taxon
field pea and baby corne0
Treatment
Hand weeding at 30 days after sowinge0
Interactor
weedye0weed
Outcome
all the growth and yield parameterse0
Direction
improvede0
Comparator
weedy checke0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“Hand weeding at 30 days after sowing, pre emergence application of pendimethalin 1 kg ha-1 and post emergence application of imazethapyr 50 g ha-1 30 days after sowing improved all the growth and yield parameters of field pea and baby corn than weedy check .”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1375–1633

Title

Growth, development and yield as affected by planting pattern and weed management in field pea and baby corn intercropping system

Moirangthem Thoithoi Devi*1; V.K. Singh Legume Research - An International Journal 2016. doi:10.18805/lr.v0iof.11039

Other claims from this paper (7)

Record rev-8db090b34f8aa38b37ec4038d13b016afeaf8dd61bd44de2baab02163986611c · schema claims-v0.9 · position 6 in the model’s answer

herbicide · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Results differ

62 papers: 45 positive, 17 negative or no effect

44 papers in the same direction as this claim · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
    Weed-control treatments significantly increased green pod yield versus unweeded control.

    Evaluation of mulching, stale seedbed, hand weeding and hoeing for weed control in organic garden pea (Pisum sativumsub sp. Hortens L.) · 2009 · compared with unweeded control

    Same directionCited by this paper

  2. no effect
    Combined harrowing caused no observed yield loss in peas.

    Effects of pre‐ and post‐emergence weed harrowing on annual weeds in peas and spring cereals · 2009

    Opposite direction

  3. negative
    Pre-emergence herbicides decreased pea seed yield.

    Effects of herbicides on nodulation, symbiotic nitrogen fixation, growth and yield of pea (Pisum sativum) · 1999

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Herbicide treatments did not reduce pea biomass or seed yield.

    Effects of Imazethapyr and Pendimethalin on Lentil (Lens culinaris), Pea (Pisum sativum), and a Subsequent Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum) Crop1 · 2001 · compared with untreated control

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Cyanazine and linuron did not affect pea pod number, grains per pod, grain weight or grain yield.

    Assessment of dimethoate toxicity on compost worm (Eisenia andrei) using earthworm avoidance test. · 2007

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Herbicide treatments decreased vegetative weight and pea yield to different degrees.

    Interaction between Nutrition and Herbicide Application in Pea Culture · 2009

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Herbicides decreased pea seed yield.

    Effect of weed management on weeds, and on the nodulation, nitrogenase activity, growth and yield of pea (Pisum sativum) · 2006

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Pea seed yield was not affected by herbicide treatments at any location.

    Response of Rotational Crops to BAY MKH 65611 · 2001

    Opposite direction

53 papers more in this group

See all 62 papers →

herbicide · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results

651 papers: 500 positive, 151 negative or no effect

499 papers in the same direction as this claim · 127 in the opposite direction · 24 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
    Lower-rate pre-emergence herbicides plus hand weeding gave yields comparable to weed-free treatment.

    Effect of integrated weed-management practices on yield and economics of babycorn (Zea mays) · 2002 · compared with weed-free treatment

    Same directionCited by this paper

  2. positive
    Baby corn can be grown profitably with 120 kg N through vermicompost and two hand weedings at 20 and 40 DAS.

    Effect of nutrient sources and weed control methods on yield and economics of baby corn (Zea mays) · 2001

    Same directionCited by this paper

  3. negative
    Without herbicide, yield was reduced regardless of row spacing or population.

    Influence of Narrow Row/High Population Corn (Zea mays) on Weed Control and Light Transmittance · 1995

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Lack of weed control reduced green ear yield and grain yield of corn.

    Corn yield response to weed and fall armyworm controls · 2010 · compared with weed control

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Herbicide-treated plots had no significant corn grain yield difference from handweeded plots.

    Effect of Postemergence Application Rate and Timing of Mesotrione on Corn (Zea mays) Response and Weed Control1 · 2002 · compared with handweeded plots

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Withholding herbicides reduced continuous corn yield by 10 to 27% in ridge tillage.

    Weed Seed Populations in Ridge and Conventional Tillage · 1988

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Corn yields in narrow rows with reduced herbicide were about 10% below wide rows with full herbicide.

    Effect of row width on herbicide and cultivation requirements in row crops · 1992 · compared with WR with 100% RAR

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Under conventional tillage, several herbicide treatments gave corn yield similar to weed-free conditions.

    Influence of Tillage Systems on Giant Foxtail,Setaria faberi, and Velvetleaf,Abutilon theophrasti, Density and Control in Corn,Zea mays · 1988 · compared with weed-free

    Opposite direction

642 papers more in this group

See all 651 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.