Paper · 2001 · Indian Journal of Agronomy

Effect of moisture conservation practices, phosphorus levels and bacterial inoculation on chickpea (Cicer arietinum) under rainfed condition

L.R. MEENA; R.K. SlNGH; R.C. GAUT AM

11
claims
25
verbatim quotes
10
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during winter (rabr) seasons of 1997 98 and 1998 99 at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi, to study the effect of conserved soil moisture, levels of phosphorus and bacterial seed inoculation. In situ moisture conservation through field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.). The next important practice was found to be field bunding green manure (GM) (dhaincha). However, both these practices did not exhibit marked differences on the yield during both the years as well as in pooled data. Application of phosphorus 60 kg P2051ha significantly increased yield attributes, yield, number of noduledplant, dry weight of nodules and consumptive use of water. The increase in above values was progressively related to P doses from 0 to 60 kg P2051ha. However, grain yield and WUE were maximum (20.02 ql ha and 8.38 kg/ha mm) up to 30 kg P2051ha in both the years. Use of phosphate solubilizing bacteria increased the yield attributes, like poddplants, seed weight1 plant and test weight and consumptive use of water and WUE of the chickpea in comparison to no inoculation.

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 resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Field bunding with farmyard manure (FYM) at 10 t/ha improved chickpea yield, nodulation and water use efficiency.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslhae1
Outcome
yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE)e1
Direction
improvede1
Setting
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhie2

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e2

“at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 85–141 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Field bunding with farmyard manure (FYM) at 10 t/ha conserved the maximum soil moisture.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslhae1
Outcome
moisturee1
Direction
conserve maximume1

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Field bunding with green manure (dhaincha) did not differ markedly from farmyard manure bunding in chickpea yield.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
field bunding green manure (GM)e3
Outcome
yielde4
Direction
did not exhibit marked differencese4
Comparator
field bunding farmyard manure (FYM)e1
Setting
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhie2

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e2

“at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 85–141 · show in text ↑
e3

“The next important practice was found to be field bunding green manure (GM) (dhaincha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 467–553 · show in text ↑
e4

“both these practices did not exhibit marked differences on the yield during both the years as well as in pooled data”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 564–680 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphorus at 60 kg P2O5/ha significantly increased chickpea yield attributes and yield.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
Application of phosphorus 60 kg P2051hae5
Outcome
yield attributes, yielde5
Direction
increasede5
Setting
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhie2

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e2

“at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 85–141 · show in text ↑
e5

“Application of phosphorus 60 kg P2051ha significantly increased yield attributes, yield, number of noduledplant, dry weight of nodules and consumptive use of water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 682–845 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphorus at 60 kg P2O5/ha significantly increased nodule number and nodule dry weight of chickpea.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
Application of phosphorus 60 kg P2051hae5
Outcome
number of noduledplant, dry weight of nodulese5
Direction
increasede5
Setting
Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhie2

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e2

“at the Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 85–141 · show in text ↑
e5

“Application of phosphorus 60 kg P2051ha significantly increased yield attributes, yield, number of noduledplant, dry weight of nodules and consumptive use of water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 682–845 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphorus at 60 kg P2O5/ha significantly increased consumptive use of water in chickpea.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
Application of phosphorus 60 kg P2051hae5
Outcome
consumptive use of watere5
Direction
increasede5

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e5

“Application of phosphorus 60 kg P2051ha significantly increased yield attributes, yield, number of noduledplant, dry weight of nodules and consumptive use of water”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 682–845 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chickpea increase in yield attributes, nodulation and water use was progressively related to phosphorus doses from 0 to 60 kg P2O5/ha.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
P doses from 0 to 60 kg P2051hae6
Outcome
above valuese6
Direction
increasee6

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e6

“The increase in above values was progressively related to P doses from 0 to 60 kg P2051ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 847–936 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain yield of chickpea was maximum at up to 30 kg P2O5/ha in both years, at 20.02 q/ha.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
30 kg P2051hae7
Outcome
grain yielde7
Direction
maximume7
Value
20.02 ql hae7
Qualifier
in both the yearse7

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e7

“grain yield and WUE were maximum (20.02 ql ha and 8.38 kg/ha mm) up to 30 kg P2051ha in both the years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–1049 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chickpea water use efficiency was maximum at up to 30 kg P2O5/ha in both years, at 8.38 kg/ha mm.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
30 kg P2051hae7
Outcome
WUEe7
Direction
maximume7
Value
8.38 kg/ha mme7
Qualifier
in both the yearse7

Not reportedComparator

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e7

“grain yield and WUE were maximum (20.02 ql ha and 8.38 kg/ha mm) up to 30 kg P2051ha in both the years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–1049 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphate solubilizing bacteria inoculation increased chickpea yield attributes compared with no inoculation.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
Use of phosphate solubilizing bacteriae6
Interactor
phosphate solubilizing bacteriae6symbiont
Outcome
yield attributese6
Direction
increasede6
Comparator
no inoculatione6

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e6

“Use of phosphate solubilizing bacteria increased the yield attributes, like poddplants, seed weight1 plant and test weight and consumptive use of water and WUE of the chickpea in comparison to no inoculation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1051–1258 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Phosphate solubilizing bacteria inoculation increased chickpea consumptive use of water and WUE compared with no inoculation.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume1
Treatment
Use of phosphate solubilizing bacteriae6
Interactor
phosphate solubilizing bacteriae6symbiont
Outcome
consumptive use of water and WUEe6
Direction
increasede6
Comparator
no inoculatione6

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“field bunding farmyard manure (FYM) 10 tonneslha proved to conserve maximum moisture and improved the yield, nodulation and water use efficiency (WUE) in chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 282–444 · show in text ↑
e6

“Use of phosphate solubilizing bacteria increased the yield attributes, like poddplants, seed weight1 plant and test weight and consumptive use of water and WUE of the chickpea in comparison to no inoculation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1051–1258 · show in text ↑

phosphorus · symbiosis · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ

51 papers: 50 positive, 1 negative or no effect

49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

47 papers more in this group

See all 51 papers →

phosphorus · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

168 papers: 161 positive, 7 negative or no effect

160 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

164 papers more in this group

See all 168 papers →

inoculation · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

217 papers: 200 positive, 17 negative or no effect

199 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

213 papers more in this group

See all 217 papers →

fertilization · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

345 papers: 326 positive, 19 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 326 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

341 papers more in this group

See all 345 papers →

fertilization · soil: physics · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

phosphorus · physiology: water · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

inoculation · physiology: water · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

fertilization · physiology: water · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 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.