Abstract
A field experiment on nutrient omission plot technique (NOPT) in Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.)-wheat {Triticum aestivum (L.) emend. Fiori & Paol} cropping system was conducted at New Delhi during 2010-11 and 2011-12. The experiment had 20 treatments, laid out in randomized block design with three replications in fixed plots. Treatments comprised omission of N, P, K, S and Zn, 50% omission of N, P, and K , absolute control (no nu- trient applied) and optimum plane of nutrition (150-26.4 -50-15-3 kg/ha N-P-K-S-Zn). Each of the 10 treatments was duplicated and randomized so that there were 20 plots within each replication for cotton. Same nutrient omis- sion treatments were tested on wheat in 50% of plots and uniform N was applied in the remaining 50% of the plots. Yield in cotton was estimated in terms of seed cotton, and stalk yield. Nitrogen proved to be most limiting nu- trient and there was a reduction in the seed cotton yield to the tune of 28%, 6.5% and 14.5% due to N, P and K omissions during the year 2010. N continued to be the most limiting nutrient followed by P and K during the year 2011. The corresponding figures for the year 2011 were 26.5 %, 15.5% and 12.4 % respectively. The yield reduc- tion in seed cotton yield due to S and Zn omission ranged from 2.0-5.0%, which was statistically at par with opti- mum nutrition treatment during both the years The reduction in the grain yield of wheat due to N, P and K omission was 35%, 9.5% and 2%, respectively during the year 2010-2011 and the corresponding figures for the year 2011- 12 were 48.5%, 11.1% and 7.7%, respectively. The reduction in grain yield due to S and Zn omission was mar- ginal and ranged from 2.0-2.5% during both the years. Highest net profit of 1,33,340 and 1,58,340 was earned from cotton-wheat cropping system during the years 2010-11 and 2011-12, respectively, in the optimum nutrition plots.
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting N reduced seed cotton yield by 28% in 2010.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutumt0 - Treatment
- Ne0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 28%e0
- Qualifier
- year 2010e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e0“Nitrogen proved to be most limiting nu- trient and there was a reduction in the seed cotton yield to the tune of 28%, 6.5% and 14.5% due to N, P and K omissions during the year 2010”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting P reduced seed cotton yield by 6.5% in 2010.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Pe0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 6.5%e0
- Qualifier
- year 2010e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e0“Nitrogen proved to be most limiting nu- trient and there was a reduction in the seed cotton yield to the tune of 28%, 6.5% and 14.5% due to N, P and K omissions during the year 2010”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting K reduced seed cotton yield by 14.5% in 2010.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- K omissionse0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 14.5%e0
- Qualifier
- year 2010e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e0“Nitrogen proved to be most limiting nu- trient and there was a reduction in the seed cotton yield to the tune of 28%, 6.5% and 14.5% due to N, P and K omissions during the year 2010”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting N reduced seed cotton yield by 26.5 % in 2011.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Ne0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 26.5 %e1
- Qualifier
- year 2011e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e0“Nitrogen proved to be most limiting nu- trient and there was a reduction in the seed cotton yield to the tune of 28%, 6.5% and 14.5% due to N, P and K omissions during the year 2010”
e1“N continued to be the most limiting nutrient followed by P and K during the year 2011. The corresponding figures for the year 2011 were 26.5 %, 15.5% and 12.4 % respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting P reduced seed cotton yield by 15.5% in 2011.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Pe0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 15.5%e1
- Qualifier
- year 2011e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e0“Nitrogen proved to be most limiting nu- trient and there was a reduction in the seed cotton yield to the tune of 28%, 6.5% and 14.5% due to N, P and K omissions during the year 2010”
e1“N continued to be the most limiting nutrient followed by P and K during the year 2011. The corresponding figures for the year 2011 were 26.5 %, 15.5% and 12.4 % respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting K reduced seed cotton yield by 12.4 % in 2011.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- K omissionse0
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 12.4 %e1
- Qualifier
- year 2011e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e0“Nitrogen proved to be most limiting nu- trient and there was a reduction in the seed cotton yield to the tune of 28%, 6.5% and 14.5% due to N, P and K omissions during the year 2010”
e1“N continued to be the most limiting nutrient followed by P and K during the year 2011. The corresponding figures for the year 2011 were 26.5 %, 15.5% and 12.4 % respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting N reduced wheat grain yield by 35% in 2010-2011.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- Ne3
- Outcome
- grain yield of wheate3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 35%e3
- Qualifier
- year 2010-2011e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e3“The reduction in the grain yield of wheat due to N, P and K omission was 35%, 9.5% and 2%, respectively during the year 2010-2011 and the corresponding figures for the year 2011- 12 were 48.5%, 11.1% and 7.7%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting P reduced wheat grain yield by 9.5% in 2010-2011.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Pe3
- Outcome
- grain yield of wheate3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 9.5%e3
- Qualifier
- year 2010-2011e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e3“The reduction in the grain yield of wheat due to N, P and K omission was 35%, 9.5% and 2%, respectively during the year 2010-2011 and the corresponding figures for the year 2011- 12 were 48.5%, 11.1% and 7.7%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting K reduced wheat grain yield by 2% in 2010-2011.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Ke3
- Outcome
- grain yield of wheate3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 2%e3
- Qualifier
- year 2010-2011e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e3“The reduction in the grain yield of wheat due to N, P and K omission was 35%, 9.5% and 2%, respectively during the year 2010-2011 and the corresponding figures for the year 2011- 12 were 48.5%, 11.1% and 7.7%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting N reduced wheat grain yield by 48.5% in 2011- 12.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Ne3
- Outcome
- grain yield of wheate3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 48.5%e3
- Qualifier
- year 2011- 12e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e3“The reduction in the grain yield of wheat due to N, P and K omission was 35%, 9.5% and 2%, respectively during the year 2010-2011 and the corresponding figures for the year 2011- 12 were 48.5%, 11.1% and 7.7%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting P reduced wheat grain yield by 11.1% in 2011- 12.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Pe3
- Outcome
- grain yield of wheate3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 11.1%e3
- Qualifier
- year 2011- 12e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e3“The reduction in the grain yield of wheat due to N, P and K omission was 35%, 9.5% and 2%, respectively during the year 2010-2011 and the corresponding figures for the year 2011- 12 were 48.5%, 11.1% and 7.7%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Omitting K reduced wheat grain yield by 7.7% in 2011- 12.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Ke3
- Outcome
- grain yield of wheate3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 7.7%e3
- Qualifier
- year 2011- 12e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e3“The reduction in the grain yield of wheat due to N, P and K omission was 35%, 9.5% and 2%, respectively during the year 2010-2011 and the corresponding figures for the year 2011- 12 were 48.5%, 11.1% and 7.7%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfur omission reduced cotton yield by 2.0-5.0%, statistically at par with optimum nutrition.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Se2
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde2
- Direction
- reduc- tione2
- Value
- 2.0-5.0%e2
- Comparator
- opti- mum nutrition treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e2“The yield reduc- tion in seed cotton yield due to S and Zn omission ranged from 2.0-5.0%, which was statistically at par with opti- mum nutrition treatment during both the years”
Claim · model-written summary
Zinc omission reduced cotton yield by 2.0-5.0%, statistically at par with optimum nutrition.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- Zne2
- Outcome
- seed cotton yielde2
- Direction
- reduc- tione2
- Value
- 2.0-5.0%e2
- Comparator
- opti- mum nutrition treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e2“The yield reduc- tion in seed cotton yield due to S and Zn omission ranged from 2.0-5.0%, which was statistically at par with opti- mum nutrition treatment during both the years”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfur omission caused a marginal 2.0-2.5% wheat grain yield reduction in both years.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e4“The reduction in grain yield due to S and Zn omission was mar- ginal and ranged from 2.0-2.5% during both the years”
Claim · model-written summary
Zinc omission caused a marginal 2.0-2.5% wheat grain yield reduction in both years.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e4“The reduction in grain yield due to S and Zn omission was mar- ginal and ranged from 2.0-2.5% during both the years”
Claim · model-written summary
Optimum nutrition plots had the highest cotton-wheat net profit, 1,33,340 in 2010-11.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutumt0
- Treatment
- optimum nutrition plotse5
- Outcome
- net profite5
- Direction
- Higheste5
- Value
- 1,33,340e5
- Qualifier
- 2010-11e5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e5“Highest net profit of 1,33,340 and 1,58,340 was earned from cotton-wheat cropping system during the years 2010-11 and 2011-12, respectively, in the optimum nutrition plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Optimum nutrition plots had the highest cotton-wheat net profit, 1,58,340 in 2011-12.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- optimum nutrition plotse5
- Outcome
- net profite5
- Direction
- Higheste5
- Value
- 1,58,340e5
- Qualifier
- 2011-12e5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum)wheat (Triticum aestivum)”
e5“Highest net profit of 1,33,340 and 1,58,340 was earned from cotton-wheat cropping system during the years 2010-11 and 2011-12, respectively, in the optimum nutrition plots”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →zinc atom · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- no effect
- negative
- negative
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →sulfur atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
144 papers more in this group
See all 148 papers →zinc atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
455 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
507 papers more in this group
See all 511 papers →phosphorus · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
94 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- positive
- negative
- no effect
100 papers more in this group
See all 104 papers →potassium · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
226 papers in the same direction as this paper · 29 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
253 papers more in this group
See all 257 papers →nitrogen · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
285 papers in the same direction as this paper · 53 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
339 papers more in this group
See all 343 papers →phosphorus · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
523 papers in the same direction as this paper · 43 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
This paper is about lacking the nutrient, so it counts the other way round here.
- negative
- negative
- no effect
568 papers more in this group
See all 572 papers →8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.