Claim · model-written summary
Without the sensor, missing seeds were lowest at 2.5 km.h-1, at 22.60%.
- Outcome
- missing seedse0
- Direction
- loweste0
- Value
- 22.60%e0
- Qualifier
- 2.5 km.h-1e0
- Comparator
- without sensor systeme0
Not reportedTaxonMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentSetting
Verbatim
e0“planter without sensor system had lowest (22.60%) missing seeds at speed of 2.5 km.h-1”
Title
Monalisa Pati; Aswini Kumar Goel; Debaraj Behera; et al. Journal of Agricultural Engineering (India) 2023. doi:10.52151/jae2022593.1777
Other claims from this paper (10)
- Method / resource The sensor detected seed drops and indicated missing drops.
- Method / resource Laboratory discrepancy between actual seed drops and display readings ranged from 4.97% to 6.72%.
- Observation Seed rate at 2.5 km.h-1 was 118.53 kg.ha-1.
- Observation Seed rate at 3.0 km.h-1 was 100.10 kg.ha-1.
- Observation Seed rate at 3.5 km.h-1 was 93.20 kg.ha-1.
- Method / resource Without the sensor, missing seeds were highest at 3.5 km.h-1, at 32.85%.
- Method / resource With the sensor, missing seeds ranged from 5.92% to 10.84%.
- Method / resource Adding the sensor reduced the missing seed index by 16-22%.
- Association Increasing forward speed decreased seed rate irrespective of sensor use.
- Association With the sensor, speed had no significant effect on seed rate.