Abstract
A field experiment was conducted during the winters of 1998–99 and 1999–2000, to evaluate the performance of macaroni or durum (Triticum durum Desf.) and bread or aestivum wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori & Paol.) under varying irrigation levels and schedules, under limited water availability situations in central India. Performance of wheat under varying irrigation (,evels revealed that the grain yield of durum and aestivum cultivars increased significantly with increasing levels of irrigation and the maximum grain yield of 5,397 and 5,960 kg/ha was obtained during 1998–99 and 1999–2000, respectively, when 6 irrigations [in addition to come up irrigation (CUl)] were applied based on physiological growth stages. Durum wheat cultivars performed better than aestivum wheat with an yield advantage of 4.5 to 8.1% at all levels of irrigations except at I0 (CUl) and I1 (CUl + CRI), where yield levels of both wheats were at par. The effective tillers/plant were 55 and 17% higher in aestivum than durum, while 1,000-grain weight was 22 and 14.2% higher in durum over aestivum during 1998–99 and 1999–2000 respectively. Significant increase in grain yield with an advantage of 12.4 and 22.5% was recorded by shifting/delaying irrigation at crown-root initiation to late tillering and late jointing (LJ) respectively. The maximum grain yield of 3,350 kg/ha and water-use efficiency of 11.72 kg/ha-mm were obtained when 1 irrigation (in addition to CUl) was applied at late jointing. The durum varieties ‘HI 8498’ and ‘HD 4672’ gave the maximum grain yield of 4,046 and 3,968 kg/ha, respectively, when 2 irrigations were applied at CRI and LJ in addition to CUl. The maximum WUE of 12.15 kg/ha-mm was recorded in ‘Lok 1’, followed by ‘HI 8498’ (12.06 kg/ha mm) and ‘HD 4672’ (11.85 kg/ha-mm).
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield of durum and aestivum wheat increased significantly with increasing irrigation levels.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- increasing levels of irrigatione1
- Outcome
- grain yielde1
- Direction
- increased significantlye1
- Setting
- central Indiae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e0“under limited water availability situations in central India”
e1“Performance of wheat under varying irrigation (,evels revealed that the grain yield of durum and aestivum cultivars increased significantly with increasing levels of irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
The maximum grain yield of 5,397 and 5,960 kg/ha was obtained with 6 irrigations in 1998–99 and 1999–2000.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 6 irrigationse2
- Outcome
- maximum grain yielde2
- Direction
- maximume2
- Value
- 5,397 and 5,960 kg/hae2
- Qualifier
- 1998–99 and 1999–2000e2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e2“the maximum grain yield of 5,397 and 5,960 kg/ha was obtained during 1998–99 and 1999–2000, respectively, when 6 irrigations [in addition to come up irrigation (CUl)] were applied based on physiological growth stages”
Claim · model-written summary
Durum wheat cultivars yielded 4.5 to 8.1% more than aestivum wheat at most irrigation levels.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- Durum wheate3
- Outcome
- yield advantagee3
- Direction
- bettere3
- Value
- 4.5 to 8.1%e3
- Qualifier
- where yield levels of both wheats were at pare3
- Comparator
- aestivum wheate3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e3“Durum wheat cultivars performed better than aestivum wheat with an yield advantage of 4.5 to 8.1% at all levels of irrigations except at I0 (CUl) and I1 (CUl + CRI), where yield levels of both wheats were at par”
Claim · model-written summary
Aestivum wheat had 55% and 17% more effective tillers per plant than durum wheat.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- aestivume4
- Outcome
- effective tillers/plante4
- Direction
- highere4
- Value
- 55 and 17%e4
- Qualifier
- during 1998–99 and 1999–2000 respectivelye4
- Comparator
- durume4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e4“The effective tillers/plant were 55 and 17% higher in aestivum than durum, while 1,000-grain weight was 22 and 14.2% higher in durum over aestivum during 1998–99 and 1999–2000 respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Durum wheat had 22% and 14.2% higher 1,000-grain weight than aestivum wheat.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- durume4
- Outcome
- 1,000-grain weighte4
- Direction
- highere4
- Value
- 22 and 14.2%e4
- Qualifier
- during 1998–99 and 1999–2000 respectivelye4
- Comparator
- aestivume4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e4“The effective tillers/plant were 55 and 17% higher in aestivum than durum, while 1,000-grain weight was 22 and 14.2% higher in durum over aestivum during 1998–99 and 1999–2000 respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Shifting irrigation from crown-root initiation to late tillering significantly increased grain yield by 12.4%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- shifting/delaying irrigation at crown-root initiation to late tilleringe5
- Outcome
- grain yielde5
- Direction
- Significant increasee5
- Value
- 12.4e5
- Comparator
- crown-root initiatione5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e5“Significant increase in grain yield with an advantage of 12.4 and 22.5% was recorded by shifting/delaying irrigation at crown-root initiation to late tillering and late jointing (LJ) respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Shifting irrigation from crown-root initiation to late jointing significantly increased grain yield by 22.5%.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- late jointing (LJ)e5
- Outcome
- grain yielde5
- Direction
- Significant increasee5
- Value
- 22.5%e5
- Comparator
- crown-root initiatione5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e5“Significant increase in grain yield with an advantage of 12.4 and 22.5% was recorded by shifting/delaying irrigation at crown-root initiation to late tillering and late jointing (LJ) respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
One irrigation at late jointing, in addition to crown-up irrigation, gave the maximum grain yield of 3,350 kg/ha.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 1 irrigation (in addition to CUl)e6
- Outcome
- maximum grain yielde6
- Direction
- maximume6
- Value
- 3,350 kg/hae6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e6“The maximum grain yield of 3,350 kg/ha and water-use efficiency of 11.72 kg/ha-mm were obtained when 1 irrigation (in addition to CUl) was applied at late jointing”
Claim · model-written summary
One irrigation at late jointing gave the maximum water-use efficiency of 11.72 kg/ha-mm.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 1 irrigation (in addition to CUl)e6
- Outcome
- water-use efficiencye6
- Direction
- maximume6
- Value
- 11.72 kg/ha-mme6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e6“The maximum grain yield of 3,350 kg/ha and water-use efficiency of 11.72 kg/ha-mm were obtained when 1 irrigation (in addition to CUl) was applied at late jointing”
Claim · model-written summary
Durum variety HI 8498 gave the maximum grain yield of 4,046 kg/ha with two irrigations at CRI and LJ.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- HI 8498e7
- Treatment
- 2 irrigations were applied at CRI and LJ in addition to CUle7
- Outcome
- maximum grain yielde7
- Direction
- maximume7
- Value
- 4,046e7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e7“The durum varieties ‘HI 8498’ and ‘HD 4672’ gave the maximum grain yield of 4,046 and 3,968 kg/ha, respectively, when 2 irrigations were applied at CRI and LJ in addition to CUl”
Claim · model-written summary
Durum variety HD 4672 gave the maximum grain yield of 3,968 kg/ha with two irrigations at CRI and LJ.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- HD 4672e7
- Treatment
- 2 irrigations were applied at CRI and LJ in addition to CUle7
- Outcome
- maximum grain yielde7
- Direction
- maximume7
- Value
- 3,968e7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e7“The durum varieties ‘HI 8498’ and ‘HD 4672’ gave the maximum grain yield of 4,046 and 3,968 kg/ha, respectively, when 2 irrigations were applied at CRI and LJ in addition to CUl”
Claim · model-written summary
Lok 1 had the maximum water-use efficiency of 12.15 kg/ha-mm.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e2“The maximum WUE of 12.15 kg/ha-mm was recorded in ‘Lok 1’, followed by ‘HI 8498’ (12.06 kg/ha mm) and ‘HD 4672’ (11.85 kg/ha-mm)”
Claim · model-written summary
HI 8498 had a water-use efficiency of 12.06 kg/ha mm, behind Lok 1.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- HI 8498e2
- Outcome
- WUEe2
- Value
- 12.06 kg/ha mme2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e2“The maximum WUE of 12.15 kg/ha-mm was recorded in ‘Lok 1’, followed by ‘HI 8498’ (12.06 kg/ha mm) and ‘HD 4672’ (11.85 kg/ha-mm)”
Claim · model-written summary
HD 4672 had a water-use efficiency of 11.85 kg/ha-mm, behind HI 8498.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- HD 4672e2
- Outcome
- WUEe2
- Value
- 11.85 kg/ha-mme2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“macaroni (Triticum durum) and bread wheats (T. aestivum)”
e2“The maximum WUE of 12.15 kg/ha-mm was recorded in ‘Lok 1’, followed by ‘HI 8498’ (12.06 kg/ha mm) and ‘HD 4672’ (11.85 kg/ha-mm)”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: water · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
252 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
299 papers more in this group
See all 303 papers →irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
985 papers more in this group
See all 989 papers →tillage · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1,115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 257 in the opposite direction · 41 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
1,410 papers more in this group
See all 1,414 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.