Abstract
A field experiment was carried during the rainy seasons of 2011 and 2012 in split-plot design at New Delhi, to study the impact of conservation practices and fertilizer levels on yield of sorghum [ Sorghum bicolor (L.) Monech] under rainfed conditions. Sorghum variety CSH 14 hybrid was planted using 2 types of tillage (minimum and con- ventional) and 2 methods of planting (ridges and furrows, and flat bed). For each type of tillage and method of planting three levels of fertilizer were applied. No significant effects of the treatments and interaction was observed at 5% level of significance on the leaves/plant, plant height, stem girth, panicle weight, harvest index and benefit: cost ratio. However, it affected the panicle length, panicle girth, 1,000-seed weight, total cost of production, gross returns and net returns significantly. The plant-moisture content was affected by sowing method and tillage type re- gardless of fertilizer levels. The highest average grain yield (2.03 tonnes/ha), fodder yield (9.42 tonnes/ha), maxi- mum cost of production ( 7.7103/ha), gross returns ( 16.0103/ha), net returns ( 8.3103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.08) were found under sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF). Yield attributes were affected by rainfall quantity between the 2 crop growing years. The system of ridges and furrows planting method in conventional tillage with 100% RDF for sorghum production, although it consumes higher expenditure (32.7%), but it provides higher return of money (139.1%) as compared to the flat bed planting in minimum tillage with 100% RDF.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
The treatments and their interaction had no significant effect on leaves/plant, plant height, stem girth.
- Treatment
- treatments and interactione0
- Outcome
- leaves/plant, plant height, stem girthe0
- Direction
- No significant effectse0
SorghumNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant effects of the treatments and interaction was observed at 5% level of significance on the leaves/plant, plant height, stem girth, panicle weight, harvest index and benefit: cost ratio.”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The treatments and their interaction had no significant effect on panicle weight, harvest index.
- Treatment
- treatments and interactione0
- Outcome
- panicle weight, harvest indexe0
- Direction
- No significant effectse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant effects of the treatments and interaction was observed at 5% level of significance on the leaves/plant, plant height, stem girth, panicle weight, harvest index and benefit: cost ratio.”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The treatments and their interaction had no significant effect on benefit: cost ratio.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No significant effects of the treatments and interaction was observed at 5% level of significance on the leaves/plant, plant height, stem girth, panicle weight, harvest index and benefit: cost ratio.”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatments significantly affected panicle length, panicle girth, 1,000-seed weight.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, it affected the panicle length, panicle girth, 1,000-seed weight, total cost of production, gross returns and net returns significantly.”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatments significantly affected total cost of production, gross returns and net returns.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, it affected the panicle length, panicle girth, 1,000-seed weight, total cost of production, gross returns and net returns significantly.”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sowing method and tillage type affected plant moisture content regardless of fertilizer level.
- Treatment
- sowing method and tillage typee0
- Outcome
- plant-moisture contente0
- Qualifier
- re- gardless of fertilizer levelse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The plant-moisture content was affected by sowing method and tillage type re- gardless of fertilizer levels”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The specified ridge and furrow, conventional tillage and fertilizer treatment produced the highest grain yield of 2.03 tonnes/ha.
- Treatment
- sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF)e0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.03 tonnes/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest average grain yield (2.03 tonnes/ha), fodder yield (9.42 tonnes/ha), maxi- mum cost of production ( 7.7103/ha), gross returns ( 16.0103/ha), net returns ( 8.3103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.08) were found under sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF).”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The specified ridge and furrow, conventional tillage and fertilizer treatment produced the highest fodder yield of 9.42 tonnes/ha.
- Treatment
- sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF)e0
- Outcome
- fodder yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 9.42 tonnes/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest average grain yield (2.03 tonnes/ha), fodder yield (9.42 tonnes/ha), maxi- mum cost of production ( 7.7103/ha), gross returns ( 16.0103/ha), net returns ( 8.3103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.08) were found under sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF).”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The specified ridge and furrow, conventional tillage and fertilizer treatment produced the highest cost of production of 7.7103/ha.
- Treatment
- sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF)e0
- Outcome
- cost of productione0
- Direction
- maxi- mume0
- Value
- 7.7103/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest average grain yield (2.03 tonnes/ha), fodder yield (9.42 tonnes/ha), maxi- mum cost of production ( 7.7103/ha), gross returns ( 16.0103/ha), net returns ( 8.3103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.08) were found under sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF).”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The specified ridge and furrow, conventional tillage and fertilizer treatment produced the highest gross returns of 16.0103/ha.
- Treatment
- sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF)e0
- Outcome
- gross returnse0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 16.0103/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest average grain yield (2.03 tonnes/ha), fodder yield (9.42 tonnes/ha), maxi- mum cost of production ( 7.7103/ha), gross returns ( 16.0103/ha), net returns ( 8.3103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.08) were found under sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF).”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The specified ridge and furrow, conventional tillage and fertilizer treatment produced the highest net returns of 8.3103/ha.
- Treatment
- sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF)e0
- Outcome
- net returnse0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 8.3103/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest average grain yield (2.03 tonnes/ha), fodder yield (9.42 tonnes/ha), maxi- mum cost of production ( 7.7103/ha), gross returns ( 16.0103/ha), net returns ( 8.3103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.08) were found under sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF).”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
The specified ridge and furrow, conventional tillage and fertilizer treatment produced the highest benefit: cost ratio of 2.08.
- Treatment
- sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF)e0
- Outcome
- benefit: cost ratioe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.08e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest average grain yield (2.03 tonnes/ha), fodder yield (9.42 tonnes/ha), maxi- mum cost of production ( 7.7103/ha), gross returns ( 16.0103/ha), net returns ( 8.3103/ha) and benefit: cost ratio (2.08) were found under sowing on ridges and furrows in conventional tillage with 100% recommended dose of fertilizer (RDF).”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rainfall quantity between the two crop years affected yield attributes.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield attributes were affected by rainfall quantity between the 2 crop growing years”
t0“sorghum (Sorghum bicolor)”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridges and furrows with conventional tillage and 100% RDF had higher expenditure than flat bed with minimum tillage and 100% RDF.
- Treatment
- ridges and furrows planting method in conventional tillage with 100% RDFe0
- Outcome
- expendituree0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 32.7%e0
- Comparator
- flat bed planting in minimum tillage with 100% RDFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The system of ridges and furrows planting method in conventional tillage with 100% RDF for sorghum production, although it consumes higher expenditure (32.7%), but it provides higher return of money (139.1%) as compared to the flat bed planting in minimum tillage with 100% RDF.”
Claim · model-written summary
Ridges and furrows with conventional tillage and 100% RDF had higher return of money than flat bed with minimum tillage and 100% RDF.
- Treatment
- ridges and furrows planting method in conventional tillage with 100% RDFe0
- Outcome
- return of moneye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 139.1%e0
- Comparator
- flat bed planting in minimum tillage with 100% RDFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The system of ridges and furrows planting method in conventional tillage with 100% RDF for sorghum production, although it consumes higher expenditure (32.7%), but it provides higher return of money (139.1%) as compared to the flat bed planting in minimum tillage with 100% RDF.”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · yield · SorghumResults differ
101 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
119 papers more in this group
See all 123 papers →fertilization · yield · SorghumPositive and negative results
417 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
442 papers more in this group
See all 446 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.