Abstract
A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003. It revealed that in increasing plant height (cm), no. of branches per plant, leaf area index (LAI), dry matter accumulation (gm per m2) and no. and dry weight (gm) of nodules per plant at different dates of observation, Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium. Again it was found that Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for higher pod yield, shelling percent, oil and protein content. Regarding nutrient concentration Rhizobium had better performance in N and K concentration but phosphobacterium gave better result in P concentration though the uptake of all the three nutrients was higher in Rhizobium inoculation. Cobalt @ 0.21 kg per ha gave best result in all the above-mentioned parameters.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for increasing plant height, branch number and leaf area index of groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnut
Arachis hypogaeae5 - Treatment
- Rhizobiume0
- Second interactor
- phosphobacteriume0other
- Outcome
- plant height (cm), no. of branches per plant, leaf area index (LAI)e0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Qualifier
- at different dates of observatione0
- Comparator
- phosphobacteriume0
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
RhizobiumOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e0“in increasing plant height (cm), no. of branches per plant, leaf area index (LAI), dry matter accumulation (gm per m2) and no. and dry weight (gm) of nodules per plant at different dates of observation, Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for increasing dry matter accumulation in groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- Rhizobiume0
- Second interactor
- phosphobacteriume0other
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulation (gm per m2)e0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Comparator
- phosphobacteriume0
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e0“in increasing plant height (cm), no. of branches per plant, leaf area index (LAI), dry matter accumulation (gm per m2) and no. and dry weight (gm) of nodules per plant at different dates of observation, Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for the number and dry weight of nodules per plant.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- Rhizobiume0
- Second interactor
- phosphobacteriume0other
- Outcome
- no. and dry weight (gm) of nodules per plante0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Qualifier
- at different dates of observatione0
- Comparator
- phosphobacteriume0
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e0“in increasing plant height (cm), no. of branches per plant, leaf area index (LAI), dry matter accumulation (gm per m2) and no. and dry weight (gm) of nodules per plant at different dates of observation, Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for higher pod yield and shelling percent in groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- Rhizobiume1
- Second interactor
- phosphobacteriume1other
- Outcome
- pod yield, shelling percente1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- phosphobacteriume1
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e1“Again it was found that Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for higher pod yield, shelling percent, oil and protein content”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for higher oil and protein content in groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- Rhizobiume1
- Second interactor
- phosphobacteriume1other
- Outcome
- oil and protein contente1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- phosphobacteriume1
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e1“Again it was found that Rhizobium was more effective than phosphobacterium for higher pod yield, shelling percent, oil and protein content”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium had better performance than phosphobacterium in N and K concentration of groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- Rhizobiume3
- Second interactor
- phosphobacteriume3other
- Outcome
- N and K concentratione3
- Direction
- better performancee3
- Comparator
- phosphobacteriume3
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e3“Regarding nutrient concentration Rhizobium had better performance in N and K concentration but phosphobacterium gave better result in P concentration though the uptake of all the three nutrients was higher in Rhizobium inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Phosphobacterium gave better result than Rhizobium in P concentration of groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- phosphobacteriume3
- Interactor
- phosphobacteriume3other
- Outcome
- P concentratione3
- Direction
- better resulte3
- Comparator
- Rhizobiume3
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e3“Regarding nutrient concentration Rhizobium had better performance in N and K concentration but phosphobacterium gave better result in P concentration though the uptake of all the three nutrients was higher in Rhizobium inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium inoculation gave higher uptake of all three nutrients than phosphobacterium in groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- Rhizobium inoculatione3
- Second interactor
- phosphobacteriume3other
- Outcome
- uptake of all the three nutrientse3
- Direction
- highere3
- Comparator
- phosphobacteriume3
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e3“Regarding nutrient concentration Rhizobium had better performance in N and K concentration but phosphobacterium gave better result in P concentration though the uptake of all the three nutrients was higher in Rhizobium inoculation”
Claim · model-written summary
Cobalt at 0.21 kg per ha gave the best result in all the above-mentioned parameters of groundnut.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae5
- Treatment
- Cobalt @ 0.21 kg per hae6
- Outcome
- all the above-mentioned parameterse6
- Direction
- best resulte6
- Setting
- Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengale5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“A field experiment was carried out on the neutral soil of Student’s Instructional Farm, Barajaguli, B. C. K. V., Nadia, West Bengal with groundnut during pre-kharif season (Feb-June) of 2001, 2002 and 2003”
e6“Cobalt @ 0.21 kg per ha gave best result in all the above-mentioned parameters”
The same questions in other papers
Rhizobium · nutrient: content · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →Rhizobium · growth · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →Rhizobium · symbiosis · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →Rhizobium · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
55 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
54 papers more in this group
See all 58 papers →Rhizobium · quality: protein · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
54 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
52 papers more in this group
See all 56 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.