Abstract
Field experiments were carried out for 2 years at Lakhaoti to study in the performance of chickpea ( Cicer arietinum L.) as influenced as irrigation, sources of P and levels of biofertilizers during 2005-06 and 2006-07. Their residual effect was studied in the succeeding fodder sorghum ( Sorghum bicolor L.). Two irrigations at flowering and pod filling recorded higher yield attributes and yield (1.56 tonne/ha) of chickpea. Further P in the form of either SSP (1.56 tonne/ha) or DAP (1.53 tonne/ha) was better when compared with rock phosphate (1.40 tonne/ha). The seed inoculation with phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB) and vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizae (VAM) (1.55 tonne/ha) followed by PSB alone recorded higher yield of chickpea. The application of rock phosphate and biofertilizer (PSB+VAM) to chickpea showed significant residual effect on the succeeding fodder sorghum. The P uptake and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea and fodder sorghum and available P status after their harvest were also significantly affected by irrigation, P sources and PSB + VAM. Chickpea-fodder sorghum as a whole was significantly influenced by combination of irrigation at flowering and pod filling, rock phosphate as source of P and biofertilizer viz., PSB+VAM resulting in higher net returns and net benefit : cost ratio.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Two irrigations at flowering and pod filling gave higher yield attributes of chickpea.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinume1 - Treatment
- Two irrigations at flowering and pod fillinge1
- Outcome
- yield attributese1
- Direction
- highere1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Two irrigations at flowering and pod filling recorded higher yield attributes and yield (1.56 tonne/ha) of chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Two irrigations at flowering and pod filling gave a higher chickpea yield of 1.56 tonne/ha.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume1
- Treatment
- Two irrigations at flowering and pod fillinge1
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 1.56 tonne/hae1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Two irrigations at flowering and pod filling recorded higher yield attributes and yield (1.56 tonne/ha) of chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
P applied as SSP (1.56 tonne/ha) was better for chickpea yield than rock phosphate (1.40 tonne/ha).
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- P in the form of either SSPe1
- Outcome
- bettere1
- Direction
- bettere1
- Value
- 1.56 tonne/hae1
- Qualifier
- 1.40 tonne/hae1
- Comparator
- rock phosphatee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“performance of chickpea”
e1“P in the form of either SSP (1.56 tonne/ha) or DAP (1.53 tonne/ha) was better when compared with rock phosphate (1.40 tonne/ha)”
Claim · model-written summary
P applied as DAP (1.53 tonne/ha) was better for chickpea yield than rock phosphate (1.40 tonne/ha).
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- DAPe1
- Outcome
- bettere1
- Direction
- bettere1
- Value
- 1.53 tonne/hae1
- Qualifier
- 1.40 tonne/hae1
- Comparator
- rock phosphatee1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“performance of chickpea”
e1“P in the form of either SSP (1.56 tonne/ha) or DAP (1.53 tonne/ha) was better when compared with rock phosphate (1.40 tonne/ha)”
Claim · model-written summary
Seed inoculation with PSB and VAM gave the highest chickpea yield (1.55 tonne/ha), followed by PSB alone.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume1
- Treatment
- seed inoculation with phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB) and vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizae (VAM)e1
- Interactor
- phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB)e1other
- Second interactor
- vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizae (VAM)e1symbiont
- Outcome
- yielde1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 1.55 tonne/hae1
- Qualifier
- followed by PSB alonee1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The seed inoculation with phosphate solubilizing bacteria (PSB) and vesicular arbuscular mycorrhizae (VAM) (1.55 tonne/ha) followed by PSB alone recorded higher yield of chickpea”
Claim · model-written summary
Rock phosphate and biofertilizer (PSB+VAM) applied to chickpea had a significant residual effect on the succeeding fodder sorghum.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e1“The application of rock phosphate and biofertilizer (PSB+VAM) to chickpea showed significant residual effect on the succeeding fodder sorghum”
Claim · model-written summary
P uptake, water use efficiency and available P status in chickpea and fodder sorghum were significantly affected by irrigation, P sources and PSB + VAM.
- Taxon
- chickpea and fodder sorghume1
- Treatment
- irrigation, P sources and PSB + VAMe1
- Outcome
- P uptake and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea and fodder sorghum and available P statuse1
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e1“The P uptake and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea and fodder sorghum and available P status after their harvest were also significantly affected by irrigation, P sources and PSB + VAM”
Claim · model-written summary
The chickpea-fodder sorghum system, under irrigation at flowering and pod filling, rock phosphate and PSB+VAM combined, gave higher net returns and net benefit : cost ratio.
- Taxon
- Chickpea-fodder sorghume1
- Treatment
- combination of irrigation at flowering and pod filling, rock phosphate as source of P and biofertilizer viz., PSB+VAMe1
- Outcome
- net returns and net benefit : cost ratioe1
- Direction
- highere1
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“Chickpea-fodder sorghum as a whole was significantly influenced by combination of irrigation at flowering and pod filling, rock phosphate as source of P and biofertilizer viz., PSB+VAM resulting in higher net returns and net benefit : cost ratio”
The same questions in other papers
mycorrhiza · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ
25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →stage · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
43 papers more in this group
See all 47 papers →irrigation · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
112 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
120 papers more in this group
See all 124 papers →phosphorus · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
160 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
164 papers more in this group
See all 168 papers →inoculation · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
199 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
213 papers more in this group
See all 217 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.