Abstract
This study investigates the economic returns of lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus) by the use of phosphorus and biofertilizers [Rhizobium and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR)] in Indian Punjab. The field experiments were conducted during Rabi 2013-14 and 2014-15 with combinations of four levels of phosphorus (0, 20, 30 and 40 kg P2O5 ha-1) and two/four biofertilizer treatments [uninoculated control and Rhizobium (LLR 12) + PGPR (RB 2)] in 2013-14, and uninoculated control, Rhizobium, PGPR and Rhizobium + PGPR in 2014-15) by replicating thrice. The use of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided the highest gross returns whereas net returns and B:C were highest at 30 kg P2O5 ha-1. The combination of Rhizobium + PGPR + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided the highest gross returns (Rs. 45902) whereas Rhizobium + PGPR+ 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided the highest net returns (Rs 20620). Furthermore, the integrated use of Rhizobium + PGPR + 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided higher net returns (Rs 20620) and B:C (1.88) as compared to sole application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (Rs 18792 and 1.72). Thus, there was a net saving of 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 with the use of Rhizobium + PGPR inoculation without sacrificing the economics returns.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave the highest gross returns in lentil.
- Taxon
- lentil
Lens culinarist0 - Treatment
- 40 kg P2O5 ha-1e1
- Outcome
- gross returnse1
- Direction
- higheste1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The use of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided the highest gross returns”
t0“in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)”
Claim · model-written summary
Application of 30 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave the highest net returns and B:C in lentil.
- Taxon
- lentilLens culinarist0
- Treatment
- 30 kg P2O5 ha-1e2
- Outcome
- net returns and B:Ce2
- Direction
- higheste2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“net returns and B:C were highest at 30 kg P2O5 ha-1”
t0“in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium + PGPR with 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave the highest gross returns in lentil (Rs. 45902).
- Taxon
- lentilLens culinarist0
- Treatment
- Rhizobium + PGPR + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1e3
- Outcome
- gross returnse3
- Direction
- higheste3
- Value
- Rs. 45902e3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“The combination of Rhizobium + PGPR + 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided the highest gross returns (Rs. 45902)”
t0“in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium + PGPR with 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave the highest net returns in lentil (Rs 20620).
- Taxon
- lentilLens culinarist0
- Treatment
- Rhizobium + PGPR+ 20 kg P2O5 ha-1e4
- Outcome
- net returnse4
- Direction
- higheste4
- Value
- Rs 20620e4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“Rhizobium + PGPR+ 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided the highest net returns (Rs 20620)”
t0“in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium + PGPR with 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave higher net returns than sole 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 in lentil (Rs 20620 against Rs 18792).
- Taxon
- lentilLens culinarist0
- Treatment
- Rhizobium + PGPR + 20 kg P2O5 ha-1e5
- Outcome
- net returnse5
- Direction
- highere5
- Value
- Rs 20620e5
- Comparator
- sole application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1e5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“the integrated use of Rhizobium + PGPR + 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided higher net returns (Rs 20620) and B:C (1.88) as compared to sole application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (Rs 18792 and 1.72)”
t0“in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium + PGPR with 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 gave higher B:C than sole 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 in lentil (1.88 against 1.72).
- Taxon
- lentilLens culinarist0
- Treatment
- Rhizobium + PGPR + 20 kg P2O5 ha-1e5
- Outcome
- B:Ce5
- Direction
- highere5
- Value
- 1.88e5
- Comparator
- sole application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1e5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“the integrated use of Rhizobium + PGPR + 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 provided higher net returns (Rs 20620) and B:C (1.88) as compared to sole application of 40 kg P2O5 ha-1 (Rs 18792 and 1.72)”
t0“in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)”
Claim · model-written summary
Rhizobium + PGPR inoculation allowed a net saving of 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 in lentil without sacrificing economic returns.
- Taxon
- lentilLens culinarist0
- Outcome
- net saving of 20 kg P2O5 ha-1e6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“there was a net saving of 20 kg P2O5 ha-1 with the use of Rhizobium + PGPR inoculation without sacrificing the economics returns”
t0“in lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus)”
The same questions in other papers
Rhizobium · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results agree
39 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
36 papers more in this group
See all 40 papers →inoculation · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results differ
64 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
65 papers more in this group
See all 69 papers →phosphorus · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results
44 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 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.