Paper · 2018 · Asia Pacific Journal of Energy and Environment

Effect of Biopesticids in Controlling Leaf Curl Virus of Chilli

K. M. Khalequzzaman; Samima Naznin; Abul Khair

10
claims
19
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

The experiment was conducted in the field laboratory of Spices Research Center, BARI, Shibganj, Bogra, Bangladesh during Rabi season of 2014-15 to find out the effect of biopesticides in controlling vector as well as leaf curl virus of chilli. The maximum infected plants (26.85%) were recorded in untreated control and the minimum infected plants (14.75%) were in Malathion (0.2%) which was statistically identical to all other biopesticides except cow urine (1:2). The highest disease reduction (45.13%) over untreated control was obtained from Malathion (0.2%) followed by cow urine (1:1) and neem leaf extract (1:2), and the lowest (26.37%) was obtained from cow milk (1:2). The highest yield (18.33 t/ha) was recorded in Malathion (0.2%) and the lowest (11.28 t/ha) was recorded in untreated control. All the biopesticides resulted least disease incidence and more yield compared to control. Among the biopesticides, cow urine (1:1), cow milk (1:1) and neem extract (1:2) showed comparatively better results against control. So, Melathion or biopesticides, cow urine (1:1), cow milk (1:1) and neem leaf extract (1:2) may be sprayed for controlling vector as well as leaf curl virus and increasing yield of chilli.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Malathion had the fewest infected plants at 14.75%.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
Malathion (0.2%)e0
Outcome
infected plantse0
Direction
minimume0
Value
14.75%e0
Comparator
untreated controle0

Verbatim

e0

“The maximum infected plants (26.85%) were recorded in untreated control and the minimum infected plants (14.75%) were in Malathion (0.2%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 244–381 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Malathion reduced disease 45.13% over untreated control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
Malathion (0.2%)e0
Outcome
disease reductione0
Direction
higheste0
Value
45.13%e0
Comparator
untreated controle0

Verbatim

e0

“The highest disease reduction (45.13%) over untreated control was obtained from Malathion (0.2%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 467–563 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cow milk at 1:2 gave the lowest disease reduction, 26.37%.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
cow milk (1:2)e0
Outcome
loweste0
Direction
loweste0
Value
26.37%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“the lowest (26.37%) was obtained from cow milk (1:2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 625–677 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Malathion had the highest chilli yield, 18.33 t/ha.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
Malathion (0.2%)e0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
18.33 t/hae0
Comparator
untreated controle0

Verbatim

e0

“The highest yield (18.33 t/ha) was recorded in Malathion (0.2%) and the lowest (11.28 t/ha) was recorded in untreated control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 679–804 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All biopesticides lowered disease incidence against control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
biopesticidese0
Outcome
disease incidencee0
Direction
leaste0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“All the biopesticides resulted least disease incidence and more yield compared to control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 806–895 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All biopesticides raised yield against control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
biopesticidese0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“All the biopesticides resulted least disease incidence and more yield compared to control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 806–895 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cow urine at 1:1 performed comparatively better than control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
cow urine (1:1)e0
Outcome
resultse0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“cow urine (1:1), cow milk (1:1) and neem extract (1:2) showed comparatively better results against control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 922–1028 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cow milk at 1:1 performed comparatively better than control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
cow milk (1:1)e0
Outcome
resultse0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“cow urine (1:1), cow milk (1:1) and neem extract (1:2) showed comparatively better results against control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 922–1028 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Neem extract at 1:2 performed comparatively better than control.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
neem extract (1:2)e0
Outcome
resultse0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“cow urine (1:1), cow milk (1:1) and neem extract (1:2) showed comparatively better results against control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 922–1028 · show in text ↑
t0

“chilli”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Authors recommend Malathion or listed biopesticides for virus control and yield.

Taxon
chillie0
Outcome
controlling vector as well as leaf curl virus and increasing yielde0

Verbatim

e0

“Melathion or biopesticides, cow urine (1:1), cow milk (1:1) and neem leaf extract (1:2) may be sprayed for controlling vector as well as leaf curl virus and increasing yield of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1034–1217 · show in text ↑

malathion · control · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

malathion · yield · Capsicum (peppers)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 →

biocontrol · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

biocontrol · disease · Capsicum (peppers)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 →

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.