Paper · 2014 · Journal of Environment and Human

Optimum NP Fertilizers Rate For Wheat Production on Alfisols of Arjo and Shambu Highlands, Western Ethiopia

Abdenna Amante; Wakene Negassa; Fite Ilfata; et al.

11
claims
25
verbatim quotes
5
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The study was conducted on Alfisols of Arjo and Shambu highlands of western Ethiopia under the farmers’ condition to determine optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production. The treatments used were four levels of N (0, 23, 46, and 60 kg ha 1 ) and three levels of P (0, 15, and 23 kg ha 1 ) in factorial arrangement. The treatments were laid out in randomized complete block design with three replications using the local wheat variety. The main effects of N were significant (P 0.05) on grain yield at all locations and seasons except for 2008 at Shambu and 2010 at Arjo. The soil analytical data showed that most of the farmers allocated the fertile parts of their land for wheat production. The economic analysis revealed that the highest net benefit were 2937.50 Eth. Birr/ha with the sole application of 23 kg N ha 1 . However, the highest marginal rate of return (MRR) was achieved with the sole application of 46 kg N ha 1 which provided 16785.70% MRR, followed by 2470.37% with the use of 23/23 kg N/P ha 1 . As P is also the limiting plant nutrients in Alfisols of Arjo and Shambu highlands, the use of 23/23 kg N/P ha 1 is found to be economical and practical for wheat production in the study area. Sensitivity analysis was carried out as well with 10% increases in inputs (labor and NP fertilizers) that maintained the recommendation. However, the recommendation (23/23 kg N/P ha 1 ) should be used, taking into account the farmers’ soil fertility classification systems. The full dose of the recommended rate should be used on the farmers’ field classified as low fertile. This implies that no need to use NP fertilizers on soils classified as fertile by farmers since the resultant lodging and disease incidence significantly reduce the grain yield.

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

N main effects were significant for wheat grain yield at all locations and seasons, except 2008 at Shambu and 2010 at Arjo.

Treatment
four levels of Ne3
Outcome
grain yielde0
Qualifier
except for 2008 at Shambu and 2010 at Arjoe0
Setting
Arjo and Shambu highlandse2

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The main effects of N were significant (P 0.05) on grain yield at all locations and seasons except for 2008 at Shambu and 2010 at Arjo”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 441–575 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
e2

“Alfisols of Arjo and Shambu highlands of western Ethiopia”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 27–84 · show in text ↑
e3

“four levels of N (0, 23, 46, and 60 kg ha 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 202–247 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Most farmers allocated the fertile parts of their land to wheat production.

Outcome
allocated the fertile parts of their lande0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The soil analytical data showed that most of the farmers allocated the fertile parts of their land for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 577–696 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The highest net benefit, 2937.50 Eth. Birr/ha, was obtained with the sole application of 23 kg N/ha.

Treatment
sole application of 23 kg N ha 1e0
Outcome
net benefite0
Direction
higheste0
Value
2937.50 Eth. Birr/hae0
Setting
Arjo and Shambu highlandse2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The economic analysis revealed that the highest net benefit were 2937.50 Eth. Birr/ha with the sole application of 23 kg N ha 1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 698–825 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
e2

“Alfisols of Arjo and Shambu highlands of western Ethiopia”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 27–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The highest marginal rate of return (16785.70%) was achieved with the sole application of 46 kg N/ha.

Treatment
sole application of 46 kg N ha 1e0
Outcome
marginal rate of return (MRR)e0
Direction
higheste0
Value
16785.70%e0
Setting
Arjo and Shambu highlandse2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the highest marginal rate of return (MRR) was achieved with the sole application of 46 kg N ha 1 which provided 16785.70% MRR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 837–962 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
e2

“Alfisols of Arjo and Shambu highlands of western Ethiopia”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 27–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The MRR with 23/23 kg N/P per ha (2470.37%) was lower than the 46 kg N/ha MRR.

Treatment
use of 23/23 kg N/P ha 1e0
Outcome
MRRe0
Direction
lowerinferrede0
Value
2470.37%e0
Setting
Arjo and Shambu highlandse2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“which provided 16785.70% MRR, followed by 2470.37% with the use of 23/23 kg N/P ha 1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 934–1018 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
e2

“Alfisols of Arjo and Shambu highlands of western Ethiopia”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 27–84 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The use of 23/23 kg N/P per ha is economical and practical for wheat production in the study area.

Treatment
use of 23/23 kg N/P ha 1e0
Outcome
economical and practicale0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the use of 23/23 kg N/P ha 1 is found to be economical and practical for wheat production in the study area”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1105–1212 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A 10% increase in inputs (labor and NP fertilizers) maintained the recommendation.

Treatment
10% increases in inputs (labor and NP fertilizers)e0
Outcome
recommendatione0
Direction
maintainede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Sensitivity analysis was carried out as well with 10% increases in inputs (labor and NP fertilizers) that maintained the recommendation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1214–1349 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The recommended 23/23 kg N/P per ha should be used, taking into account farmers’ soil fertility classification systems.

Outcome
recommendation (23/23 kg N/P ha 1) should be usede0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the recommendation (23/23 kg N/P ha 1) should be used, taking into account the farmers’ soil fertility classification systems”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 1360–1486 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The full recommended rate should be used on farmers’ fields classified as low fertile.

Outcome
full dose of the recommended ratee0
Setting
farmers’ field classified as low fertilee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The full dose of the recommended rate should be used on the farmers’ field classified as low fertile”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1488–1588 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

NP fertilizers are not needed on soils that farmers classify as fertile.

Outcome
no need to use NP fertilizerse0
Setting
soils classified as fertile by farmerse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“no need to use NP fertilizers on soils classified as fertile by farmers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1608–1679 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)basis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Lodging and disease incidence significantly reduce wheat grain yield.

Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
reducee0
Qualifier
lodging and disease incidencee0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“since the resultant lodging and disease incidence significantly reduce the grain yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1680–1766 · show in text ↑
e1

“optimum NP fertilizers rate for wheat production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 127–175 · show in text ↑

nitrogen · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

2,061 papers: 1,737 positive, 324 negative or no effect

1,736 papers in the same direction as this paper · 285 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

2,057 papers more in this group

See all 2,061 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.