Paper · 2016 · International Journal of Plant Animal and Environmental Sciences

Efficacy of Biochar from Tender Coconut Husk on Yield of Yard Long Bean in Ferralitic Soils

M. S. Mariya Dainy; P B Usha

2
claims
4
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

An experiment was conducted at College of Agriculture, Vellayani of Kerala Agricultural University to investigate the efficacy of biochar from tender coconut husk for enhanced crop production. Biochar was produced, characterized and tested in the field at different levels of application viz. 10 and 20 and 30 t ha-1 using yard long bean variety Vellayani Jyothika as the test crop during January 2013 to April 2013. Along with biochar, other commonly used organic manures viz. Farm yard manure and vermicompost; biofertilizers namely Plant Growth Promoting Rhizobacteria (PGPR) and Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungi (AMF) were also tested in the field. The experiments were laid out in Randomized Block Design with three replications. The treatments were 1. Package of Practices recommendation (POP), 2. Biochar @ 10 t ha-1 + NPK as per POP, 3. Biochar @ 20 t ha-1 + NPK as per POP, 4. Biochar @ 30 t ha-1 + NPK as per POP, 5. Biochar @ 20 t ha-1 + 75 % NPK as per POP, 6. Biochar @ 10 t ha-1 + FYM @ 10 t ha-1 + 75 % NPK as per POP, 7. Biochar @ 10 t ha-1 + vermicompost @ 5 tha-1 + 75% NPK as per POP, 8. Biochar @ 20 t ha-1 + 2 % PGPR + NPK as per POP 9. Biochar @ 20 t ha-1 + AMF @ 200 g m-2 + NPK as per POP. Biochar application @ 20 t ha-1 along with 2 % PGPR and NPK as per POP resulted in better total dry matter production (TDM), pod protein, Harvest Index (HI) and finally B: C ratio and pod yield.

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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biochar at 20 t/ha with 2% PGPR and NPK gave better total dry matter, pod protein and harvest index.

Material
Vellayani Jyothikae0
Treatment
Biochar application @ 20 t ha-1 along with 2 % PGPR and NPK as per POPe1
Interactor
PGPRe1symbiont
Outcome
total dry matter production (TDM), pod protein, Harvest Index (HI)e1
Direction
bettere1

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata subsp. sesquipedalis
Vigna unguiculata subsp. sesquipedalis · TaxonDavid · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“using yard long bean variety Vellayani Jyothika as the test crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 317–381 · show in text ↑
e1

“Biochar application @ 20 t ha-1 along with 2 % PGPR and NPK as per POP resulted in better total dry matter production (TDM), pod protein, Harvest Index (HI) and finally B: C ratio and pod yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1210–1403 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biochar at 20 t/ha with 2% PGPR and NPK gave better B:C ratio and pod yield.

Material
Vellayani Jyothikae0
Treatment
Biochar application @ 20 t ha-1 along with 2 % PGPR and NPK as per POPe1
Interactor
PGPRe1symbiont
Outcome
B: C ratio and pod yielde1
Direction
bettere1

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna unguiculata subsp. sesquipedalis
Vigna unguiculata subsp. sesquipedalis · TaxonDavid · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“using yard long bean variety Vellayani Jyothika as the test crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 317–381 · show in text ↑
e1

“Biochar application @ 20 t ha-1 along with 2 % PGPR and NPK as per POP resulted in better total dry matter production (TDM), pod protein, Harvest Index (HI) and finally B: C ratio and pod yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1210–1403 · show in text ↑

inoculation · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Results differ

116 papers: 99 positive, 17 negative or no effect

98 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

112 papers more in this group

See all 116 papers →

storage · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

biochar · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

22 papers: 18 positive, 4 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

18 papers more in this group

See all 22 papers →

fertilization · yield · Vigna unguiculata (cowpea)Positive and negative results

292 papers: 275 positive, 17 negative or no effect

274 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

288 papers more in this group

See all 292 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.