Abstract
Field experiments were conducted during the kharif seasons of 1999 and 2000 to study the effect of P levels, FYM and lime on yield, P use efficiency (PUE) by maize and forms of soil acidity. Application of 60 kg P2O5 with 5 t FYM and 2 t lime ha−1 resulted in a significant increase in yield, test weight, P uptake and PUE by maize. Available P and exchangeable Ca and Mg in post-harvest soil also increased due to application of P, FYM and lime but there was a considerable decline in exchangeable Al due to liming. Application of lime and FYM along with P reduced the different forms of acidity and the exchangeable acidity registered a decline up to 72 per cent on liming. Soil available P showed significant negative correlation with exchangeable acidity.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 7
Claim · model-written summary
Combined P, FYM, and lime significantly increased maize yield and test weight.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 60 kg P2O5 with 5 t FYM and 2 t lime ha−1 resulted in a significant increase in yield, test weight, P uptake and PUE by maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined P, FYM, and lime significantly increased maize P uptake and PUE.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 60 kg P2O5 with 5 t FYM and 2 t lime ha−1 resulted in a significant increase in yield, test weight, P uptake and PUE by maize”
Claim · model-written summary
P, FYM, and lime increased postharvest soil available P and exchangeable Ca and Mg.
- Treatment
- P, FYM and limee0
- Outcome
- Available P and exchangeable Ca and Mg in post-harvest soile0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Available P and exchangeable Ca and Mg in post-harvest soil also increased due to application of P, FYM and lime”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming considerably decreased exchangeable Al.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was a considerable decline in exchangeable Al due to liming”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Lime and FYM with P reduced different soil acidity forms.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of lime and FYM along with P reduced the different forms of acidity”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming reduced exchangeable acidity by up to 72 per cent.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the exchangeable acidity registered a decline up to 72 per cent on liming”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil available P correlated significantly and negatively with exchangeable acidity.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil available P showed significant negative correlation with exchangeable acidity”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
lime · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
38 papers more in this group
See all 42 papers →fertilization · quality: sugar starch · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
70 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
81 papers more in this group
See all 85 papers →fertilization · nutrient: efficiency · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
173 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
185 papers more in this group
See all 189 papers →lime · quality: sugar starch · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →phosphorus · quality: grain · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →phosphorus · nutrient: efficiency · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →lime · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
70 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
91 papers more in this group
See all 95 papers →fertilization · quality: grain · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
88 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
102 papers more in this group
See all 106 papers →8 of 11 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.