Abstract
Integrated use of vermicompost, biofertilizers and chemical fertilizers was carried out to evaluate the yield performance of WH-711 under saline and non saline irrigation water during rabi seasons of 2011-2012 and 2012-2013 at Hisar, Haryana. Effective tillers/mrl, ear head length (cm), number of grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha) were significantly higher in canal water as compared to saline water during both the years. Number of effective tillers/mrl, number of grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha) were maximum in Azotobacter ST3 and Pseudomonas P36 + vermicompost @5 t/ha and minimum in no inoculation treatment during 2011-12 and 2012-13. Application of 125% RDF, being statistically at par with 100% RDF, produced significantly higher number of effective tillers/mrl, grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha) than 75% RDF during 2011-12 and 2012-13. Test weight (g) and harvest index did not differ significantly under quality of irrigation water, levels of fertilizer and inoculation and vermicompost treatments during both the years. The INM treatment INVC125% RDF recorded maximum gross returns (avg. Rs. 90,133/ha), but net returns were better in IN125% RDF (avg. Rs. 55, 242/ha). Moreover, integrated use of bio-fertilizer and 100% RDF resulted in maximum B: C ratio (avg. 2.80).
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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
Canal water gave significantly higher wheat tiller, ear, grain and yield traits than saline water.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- canal watere0
- Outcome
- Effective tillers/mrl, ear head length (cm), number of grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- saline watere0
- Setting
- canal watere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effective tillers/mrl, ear head length (cm), number of grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha) were significantly higher in canal water as compared to saline water during both the years.”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter ST3 and Pseudomonas P36 with vermicompost gave maximal wheat tillers, grains and yields.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Azotobacter ST3 and Pseudomonas P36 + vermicompost @5 t/hae0
- Interactor
- Azotobacter ST3e0symbiont
- Second interactor
- Pseudomonas P36e0symbiont
- Outcome
- Number of effective tillers/mrl, number of grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha)e0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Comparator
- no inoculation treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Number of effective tillers/mrl, number of grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha) were maximum in Azotobacter ST3 and Pseudomonas P36 + vermicompost @5 t/ha and minimum in no inoculation treatment during 2011-12 and 2012-13.”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
125% RDF increased wheat tillers, grains and yields compared with 75% RDF and was at par with 100% RDF.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 125% RDFe0
- Outcome
- number of effective tillers/mrl, grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- statistically at par with 100% RDFe0
- Comparator
- 75% RDFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 125% RDF, being statistically at par with 100% RDF, produced significantly higher number of effective tillers/mrl, grains/spike, grain, straw and biological yields (q/ha) than 75% RDF during 2011-12 and 2012-13.”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Test weight and harvest index did not differ significantly among irrigation, fertilizer or inoculation treatments.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- quality of irrigation water, levels of fertilizer and inoculation and vermicompost treatmentse0
- Outcome
- Test weight (g) and harvest indexe0
- Direction
- did not differe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Test weight (g) and harvest index did not differ significantly under quality of irrigation water, levels of fertilizer and inoculation and vermicompost treatments during both the years.”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
INVC125% RDF gave maximum gross returns.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- INVC125% RDFe0
- Outcome
- maximum gross returnse0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- Rs. 90,133/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The INM treatment INVC125% RDF recorded maximum gross returns (avg. Rs. 90,133/ha)”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
IN125% RDF gave better net returns.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- IN125% RDFe0
- Outcome
- net returnse0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Value
- Rs. 55, 242/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“net returns were better in IN125% RDF (avg. Rs. 55, 242/ha)”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Biofertilizer with 100% RDF gave the maximum benefit to cost ratio.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- bio-fertilizer and 100% RDFe0
- Outcome
- B: C ratioe0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 2.80e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“integrated use of bio-fertilizer and 100% RDF resulted in maximum B: C ratio (avg. 2.80)”
t0“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
The same questions in other papers
Pseudomonas · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →Azotobacter · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
86 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
84 papers more in this group
See all 88 papers →irrigation · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →inoculation · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →fertilization · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 119 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
150 papers more in this group
See all 154 papers →fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
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.