Claim · model-written summary
Weeders differed significantly in field capacity.
Not reportedTaxonMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionQualifier
Verbatim
e0“There was highly significant mean difference in the field capacity of weeders (P=<.0001)”
Title
Performance Evaluation of Manually Operated Weeders Developed in ANGRAU
K. Sandhya Devi T. Neeraja; V. Prasuna International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 2021. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2021.1008.074
Other claims from this paper (11)
- Method / resource The one wheel straight pronged weeder had the best field capacity.
- Method / resource Plant damage differed significantly among weeders.
- Method / resource Traditional hand weeding had the lowest plant damage, followed by one wheel straight and curve pronged weeders.
- Method / resource Weeding index did not differ significantly among weeders.
- Method / resource Conventional hand weeding had the highest mean weeding index, followed by three named weeders.
- Method / resource Energy use differed significantly between conventional weeding and the tested weeders.
- Method / resource Energy expenditure did not differ significantly among the other weeders.
- Method / resource Traditional hand weeding had lower mean energy expenditure.
- Method / resource Two wheel straight pronged weeder had the lowest mean energy expenditure among weeders.
- Method / resource Weeder performance index differed significantly.
- Method / resource One wheel straight pronged weeder had the maximum performance index and traditional hand weeding the minimum.