Paper · 2006 · Journal of Tropical Agriculture

Do biodynamic practices influence yield, quality, and economics of cultivation of chilli ( Capsicum annuum L.)?

P Jayasree; Annamma George

7
claims
12
verbatim quotes
17
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Effects of adopting a biodynamic calendar for timing the cultural operations and a manurial schedule involving two biodynamic preparations (separately or together) and panchagavyam (a mixture of 5:1 cow dung and ghee in a 5:3:3:5 cow’s urine, curd, milk, and water formulation) in conjunction with organic manures as well as ‘organic manures alone’, and the recommended practices of nutrient management (RP) on yield, quality, and economics of chilli cultivation were evaluated in a field experiment. Results show that RP (i.e., application of 20 Mg ha -1 farmyard manure+75:40:25 N:P 2 O 5 :K 2 O kg ha -1 ) significantly improved fruit yield, net returns, and B: C ratio. Although biodynamic calendar and biodynamic preparations had no spectacular effects on the characters studied, application of organic manures generally promoted fruit quality in chilli. Indeed, panchagavyam + organic manure demonstrated the maximum shelf life and the ‘organic manures alone’ (on nutrient equivalent basis) showed the highest ascorbic acid content of chilli fruits.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Recommended nutrient management significantly improved chilli fruit yield.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
RPe0
Outcome
fruit yielde0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Results show that RP (i.e., application of 20 Mg ha -1 farmyard manure+75:40:25 N:P 2 O 5 :K 2 O kg ha -1 ) significantly improved fruit yield, net returns, and B: C ratio.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 501–673 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli ( Capsicum annuum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Recommended nutrient management significantly improved net returns.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
RPe0
Outcome
net returnse0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Results show that RP (i.e., application of 20 Mg ha -1 farmyard manure+75:40:25 N:P 2 O 5 :K 2 O kg ha -1 ) significantly improved fruit yield, net returns, and B: C ratio.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 501–673 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli ( Capsicum annuum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Recommended nutrient management significantly improved benefit to cost ratio.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
RPe0
Outcome
B: C ratioe0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Results show that RP (i.e., application of 20 Mg ha -1 farmyard manure+75:40:25 N:P 2 O 5 :K 2 O kg ha -1 ) significantly improved fruit yield, net returns, and B: C ratio.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 501–673 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli ( Capsicum annuum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biodynamic calendar and preparations had no spectacular effects on the studied chilli characters.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
biodynamic calendar and biodynamic preparationse0
Outcome
characters studiede0
Direction
no spectacular effectse0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Although biodynamic calendar and biodynamic preparations had no spectacular effects on the characters studied”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 674–783 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli ( Capsicum annuum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Organic manures generally promoted chilli fruit quality.

Taxon
chillie0
Treatment
organic manurese0
Outcome
fruit qualitye0
Direction
promotede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“application of organic manures generally promoted fruit quality in chilli.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 785–859 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Panchagavyam plus organic manure produced maximum chilli shelf life.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
panchagavyam + organic manuree0
Outcome
shelf lifee0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“panchagavyam + organic manure demonstrated the maximum shelf life”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 868–933 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli ( Capsicum annuum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–110 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Organic manures alone gave the highest ascorbic acid content of chilli fruits.

Taxon
chillie0
Organ / stage
fruitse0
Treatment
organic manures alonee0
Outcome
ascorbic acid contente0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“‘organic manures alone’ (on nutrient equivalent basis) showed the highest ascorbic acid content of chilli fruits.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 942–1055 · show in text ↑

fertilization · quality: grain · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

fertilization · quality: postharvest · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 3 positive, 2 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

fertilization · quality: phytochemicals · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

23 papers: 22 positive, 1 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 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.