Paper · 1990 · Indian Journal of Weed Science

Integrated weed manager lent in summer mungbean (vigna radiala(l.) wilzeck)

YC Gupta; S. K. Katyal; R. S. Panwar; et al.

5
claims
12
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Field studies conducted during summer seasons of 1987 and 1988 at Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar showed that number of harro wings did not influence the weed population. The weed dry weight was significan]y higher in plots harrowed only ones compared to plots harrowed thrice. Yield and yiel I attributej of mungbean were not influenced by tillage. Peudimethalin 1.5 kg/ha did not pre ve effective enough to produce similar yield increases as in the weed free check however, whea integrated with one hoeing or two hoeings at 20 and 40 days after sowing, it was at par witl weed free check.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Number of harrowings did not influence the weed population.

Taxon
mungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
number of harro wingse1
Interactor
weede1weed
Outcome
weed populatione1
Direction
did not influencee1
Setting
Haryana Agricultural University, Hisare0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“summer mungbean (vigna radiala(l.) wilzeck)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–75 · show in text ↑
e0

“Field studies conducted during summer seasons of 1987 and 1988 at Haryana Agricultural University, Hisar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–104 · show in text ↑
e1

“number of harro wings did not influence the weed population”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 117–176 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Weed dry weight was higher in plots harrowed only once than in plots harrowed thrice.

Taxon
mungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
plots harrowed only onese2
Interactor
weede2weed
Outcome
weed dry weighte2
Direction
highere2
Comparator
plots harrowed thricee2

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“summer mungbean (vigna radiala(l.) wilzeck)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–75 · show in text ↑
e2

“The weed dry weight was significan]y higher in plots harrowed only ones compared to plots harrowed thrice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 178–283 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield and yield attributes of mungbean were not influenced by tillage.

Taxon
mungbeanVigna radiatae3
Treatment
tillagee3
Outcome
Yield and yiel I attributeje3
Direction
not influencede3

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“summer mungbean (vigna radiala(l.) wilzeck)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–75 · show in text ↑
e3

“Yield and yiel I attributej of mungbean were not influenced by tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 285–355 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Peudimethalin 1.5 kg/ha did not prevent weed-related yield loss effectively enough to match the weed-free check.

Taxon
mungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
Peudimethalin 1.5 kg/hae4
Outcome
yield increasese4
Direction
did not pre ve effective enoughe4
Comparator
weed free checke4

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“summer mungbean (vigna radiala(l.) wilzeck)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–75 · show in text ↑
e4

“Peudimethalin 1.5 kg/ha did not pre ve effective enough to produce similar yield increases as in the weed free check”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 357–473 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Peudimethalin integrated with one or two hoeings at 20 and 40 days after sowing was at par with the weed-free check in yield increase.

Taxon
mungbeanVigna radiatat0
Treatment
integrated with one hoeing or two hoeings at 20 and 40 days after sowinge5
Outcome
yield increasese4
Direction
at pare5
Comparator
weed free checke5

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

Vigna radiata
Vigna radiata · TaxonIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“summer mungbean (vigna radiala(l.) wilzeck)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 32–75 · show in text ↑
e4

“Peudimethalin 1.5 kg/ha did not pre ve effective enough to produce similar yield increases as in the weed free check”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 357–473 · show in text ↑
e5

“however, whea integrated with one hoeing or two hoeings at 20 and 40 days after sowing, it was at par witl weed free check”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 474–596 · show in text ↑

tillage · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

81 papers: 67 positive, 14 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 67 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

77 papers more in this group

See all 81 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.