Paper · 2016 · Science Technology and Development

Agroeconomic Evaluation of Late Sown Wheat (Pak-13) for Nutrient Ratiosand Seeding Densities under Rainfed Conditions

Syed Haider Abbas; Ayesha Tahir; Saira Batool; et al.

8
claims
18
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Breeding in wheat crop for improvement in new varieties having high yield, besides desirable and durable disease resistance is a continuous and long-term process and if it is coupled with better agro economic traits evaluation, there can be a clearer picture about the performance of newly developed cultivar in any crop species. A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions. It was a 'Randomized Complete Block Desig'n with split plot arrangement, having fertilizer ratios in main plots and seeding densities in subplots. Both fertilizer ratios and seeding densities had four levels. From the analyzed data, it was revealed that under late sown circumstances, different nutrient ratios were statistically different in chlorophyll contents, number of tillers (mG 2 ) and biological yield (kg haG 1 ), whereas, it was at par for plant height, spike length, leaf area and grain yield (kg haG 1 ). It was also revealed that there were 22 and 21% higher tillers mG 2 and biological yield (kg haG 1 ), as compared to those conditions when there was no fertilizer application in the soil. In case of various seeding densities, a significant response was found for number of tillers (mG 2 ), biological yield (kg haG 1 ) and grain yield (kg haG 1 ). In case of interaction of nutrient ratios with seeding densities, a significant response was found only in biological yield (kg haG 1 ) at F3 (90:60 N P kg haG 1 )SD4 (140 kg haG 1 ). While considering the benefit cost ratio (BCR) for nutrient ratios, it was found maximum at 45:30 level (F2) which was 1:8.45. In case of seeding densities, maximum BCR was observed in 80 kg haG 1 (1:17.61).

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Under late sown conditions, nutrient ratios were statistically different in chlorophyll contents, number of tillers and biological yield.

Treatment
nutrient ratiose1
Outcome
chlorophyll contents, number of tillers (mG 2 ) and biological yield (kg haG 1 )e1
Qualifier
late sown conditionse0
Setting
Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabade0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e1

“different nutrient ratios were statistically different in chlorophyll contents, number of tillers (mG 2 ) and biological yield (kg haG 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 783–921 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nutrient ratios had no significant effect on plant height, spike length or leaf area under late sown conditions.

Treatment
nutrient ratiose1
Outcome
plant height, spike length, leaf areae2
Direction
no_changeinferrede2
Setting
Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabade0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e1

“different nutrient ratios were statistically different in chlorophyll contents, number of tillers (mG 2 ) and biological yield (kg haG 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 783–921 · show in text ↑
e2

“it was at par for plant height, spike length, leaf area and grain yield (kg haG 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 932–1015 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Nutrient ratios had no significant effect on grain yield under late sown conditions.

Treatment
nutrient ratiose1
Outcome
grain yield (kg haG 1 )e2
Direction
no_changeinferrede2
Setting
Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabade0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e1

“different nutrient ratios were statistically different in chlorophyll contents, number of tillers (mG 2 ) and biological yield (kg haG 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 783–921 · show in text ↑
e2

“it was at par for plant height, spike length, leaf area and grain yield (kg haG 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 932–1015 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer application increased tillers and biological yield by 22 and 21% compared with no fertilizer application in the soil.

Treatment
fertilizer applicatione3
Outcome
tillers mG 2 and biological yield (kg haG 1 )e3
Direction
highere3
Value
22 and 21%e3
Comparator
no fertilizer application in the soile3

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e3

“It was also revealed that there were 22 and 21% higher tillers mG 2 and biological yield (kg haG 1 ), as compared to those conditions when there was no fertilizer application in the soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1203 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Seeding densities had a significant effect on number of tillers, biological yield and grain yield.

Treatment
seeding densitiese4
Outcome
number of tillers (mG 2 ), biological yield (kg haG 1 ) and grain yield (kg haG 1 )e4
Setting
Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabade0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e4

“In case of various seeding densities, a significant response was found for number of tillers (mG 2 ), biological yield (kg haG 1 ) and grain yield (kg haG 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1205–1363 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The interaction of nutrient ratios with seeding densities gave a significant response only in biological yield.

Treatment
nutrient ratios with seeding densitiese5
Outcome
biological yield (kg haG 1 )e5
Qualifier
at F3 (90:60 N P kg haG 1 )SD4 (140 kg haG 1 )e5

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e5

“In case of interaction of nutrient ratios with seeding densities, a significant response was found only in biological yield (kg haG 1 ) at F3 (90:60 N P kg haG 1 )SD4 (140 kg haG 1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1365–1547 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nutrient ratios at the 45:30 level (F2) gave the maximum benefit cost ratio of 1:8.45.

Treatment
nutrient ratiose6
Outcome
benefit cost ratio (BCR)e6
Direction
maximume6
Value
1:8.45e6
Qualifier
45:30 level (F2)e6

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e6

“While considering the benefit cost ratio (BCR) for nutrient ratios, it was found maximum at 45:30 level (F2) which was 1:8.45”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1549–1674 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Seeding densities gave the maximum benefit cost ratio of 1:17.61 at 80 kg per hectare.

Treatment
seeding densitiese7
Outcome
BCRe7
Direction
maximume7
Value
1:17.61e7
Qualifier
80 kg haG 1e7

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A field study was conducted at the Research Farm Area of National Agricultural Research Centre, Islamabad, in wheat program during 2014-15, under late sown conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 330–496 · show in text ↑
e7

“In case of seeding densities, maximum BCR was observed in 80 kg haG 1 (1:17.61)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1676–1755 · show in text ↑

density · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

498 papers: 376 positive, 122 negative or no effect

375 papers in the same direction as this paper · 115 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

494 papers more in this group

See all 498 papers →

fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

3,434 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 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.