Abstract
A Held experiment was conducted during 2002–03 and 2003–04 to evaluate the effects of sowing dates, sowing method and varieties on sugarbeet yield in semi-arid environment of Punjab. The crop sown on October 10 gave the highest root yield (77.21 ha−1) and was significantly better than September 25 and October 25 sowings during 2002–03, while in 2003–04, September 25 sown crop produced the highest root yield (88.3 t ha−1) and was at par with October 10 sowing. On an average, the delay in planting from September 25 to October 10 was at par while further delay in sowing i.e. Oct 25, brought 19.4 per cent reduction. September 25 and October 10 sowings produced statistically higher root and sugar yield than October 25 sowing during both the years. Among varieties, cv. Posada yielded 22.3 per cent higher mean root yield (84.61 ha−1) and 28.9 per cent mean sugar yield (12.21 ha−1) than H 10064. Sucrose content in roots did not vary due to sowing dates and varieties. The root yield, sucrose content and sugar yield were not influenced by sowing methods.
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
October 10 sowing produced the highest root yield in 2002–03, significantly exceeding September 25 and October 25.
- Taxon
- sugarbeet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- October 10e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 77.21 ha−1e0
- Qualifier
- during 2002–03e0
- Comparator
- September 25 and October 25 sowingse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The crop sown on October 10 gave the highest root yield (77.21 ha−1) and was significantly better than September 25 and October 25 sowings during 2002–03”
t0“sugarbeet”
Claim · model-written summary
September 25 sowing produced the highest root yield in 2003–04 and was at par with October 10.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- September 25e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 88.3 t ha−1e0
- Qualifier
- in 2003–04e0
- Comparator
- October 10 sowinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in 2003–04, September 25 sown crop produced the highest root yield (88.3 t ha−1) and was at par with October 10 sowing”
t0“sugarbeet”
Claim · model-written summary
Delaying sowing to October 25 reduced mean yield by 19.4 per cent.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Oct 25e0
- Outcome
- reductione0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 19.4 per cente0
- Comparator
- September 25 to October 10e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the delay in planting from September 25 to October 10 was at par while further delay in sowing i.e. Oct 25, brought 19.4 per cent reduction”
t0“sugarbeet”
Claim · model-written summary
September 25 and October 10 sowing produced higher root and sugar yield than October 25 in both years.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- September 25 and October 10 sowingse0
- Outcome
- root and sugar yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- during both the yearse0
- Comparator
- October 25 sowinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“September 25 and October 10 sowings produced statistically higher root and sugar yield than October 25 sowing during both the years”
t0“sugarbeet”
Claim · model-written summary
Posada had 22.3 per cent higher mean root yield than H 10064.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Material
- Posadae0
- Outcome
- mean root yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 22.3 per cente0
- Qualifier
- 84.61 ha−1e0
- Comparator
- H 10064e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cv. Posada yielded 22.3 per cent higher mean root yield (84.61 ha−1) and 28.9 per cent mean sugar yield (12.21 ha−1) than H 10064”
t0“sugarbeet”
Claim · model-written summary
Posada had 28.9 per cent greater mean sugar yield than H 10064.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Material
- Posadae0
- Outcome
- mean sugar yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 28.9 per cente0
- Qualifier
- 12.21 ha−1e0
- Comparator
- H 10064e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cv. Posada yielded 22.3 per cent higher mean root yield (84.61 ha−1) and 28.9 per cent mean sugar yield (12.21 ha−1) than H 10064”
t0“sugarbeet”
Claim · model-written summary
Sucrose content did not vary with sowing date or variety.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- sowing dates and varietiese0
- Outcome
- Sucrose content in rootse0
- Direction
- did not varye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sucrose content in roots did not vary due to sowing dates and varieties”
t0“sugarbeet”
Claim · model-written summary
Sowing method did not influence root yield, sucrose content or sugar yield.
- Taxon
- sugarbeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- sowing methodse0
- Outcome
- root yield, sucrose content and sugar yielde0
- Direction
- not influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The root yield, sucrose content and sugar yield were not influenced by sowing methods”
t0“sugarbeet”
The same questions in other papers
sowing time · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 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.