Abstract
A field experiment was conducted in the Regional Research Technology and Transfer Station (RRTTS), Chiplima, Sambalpur for two years to study the effect of different sources and levels on growth, yield and uptake of sulphur in onion (cv. Nasik Red). The treatment consists of two sources of sulphur (elemental gromor sulphur and gypsum) and three levels of sulphur (20, 35 and 50 kg S ha -1) from both the sources along with control by adopting RBD with three replications. The result showed that yield attributes like plant height, bulb length, bulb diameter, neck length and average weight of bulb were increased significantly up to 35 kg S ha -1 and thereafter, declined in both the sources of sulphur. The maximum bulb yield was obtained with application of sulphur at 35 kg ha -1 and it was significantly superior to no sulphur and 20 kg S ha -1 and at par with 50 kg S ha -1 in both the sources of sulphur. Application of 35 kg S ha -1 produced an additional bulb yield of 3.8 t ha -1 in gypsum and 5.4 t ha -1 in gromorsulphur over control. The sulphur use efficiency of the crop showed an increasing trend up to 35 kg S ha -1 and thereafter decreased in both the sources. The highest net return and benefit cost ratio were achieved with the application of 35 kg S ha -1 in both the sources of sulphur. Comparing two sulphur sources, gromorsulphur resulted in higher growth, bulb yield, sulphur use efficiency and economics in comparison to gypsum.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Onion plant height, bulb length and bulb diameter increased significantly through 35 kg S ha -1 and then declined.
- Taxon
- onion
Allium cepat0 - Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1e0
- Outcome
- plant height, bulb length, bulb diametere0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- both the sources of sulphure0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plant height, bulb length, bulb diameter, neck length and average weight of bulb were increased significantly up to 35 kg S ha -1 and thereafter, declined in both the sources of sulphur”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Onion neck length and mean bulb weight increased significantly through 35 kg S ha -1 and then declined.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1e0
- Outcome
- neck length and average weight of bulbe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plant height, bulb length, bulb diameter, neck length and average weight of bulb were increased significantly up to 35 kg S ha -1 and thereafter, declined in both the sources of sulphur”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Bulb yield peaked at 35 kg sulphur per hectare and exceeded zero sulphur significantly.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- sulphur at 35 kg ha -1e0
- Outcome
- bulb yielde0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Comparator
- no sulphure0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maximum bulb yield was obtained with application of sulphur at 35 kg ha -1 and it was significantly superior to no sulphur”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Bulb yield at 35 kg sulphur per hectare exceeded 20 kg S ha -1 significantly.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- sulphur at 35 kg ha -1e0
- Outcome
- bulb yielde0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Comparator
- 20 kg S ha -1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maximum bulb yield was obtained with application of sulphur at 35 kg ha -1 and it was significantly superior to no sulphur and 20 kg S ha -1”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Bulb yield at 35 kg sulphur per hectare was at par with 50 kg S ha -1.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1t1
- Outcome
- bulb yielde1
- Direction
- at pare0
- Comparator
- 50 kg S ha -1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“at par with 50 kg S ha -1 in both the sources of sulphur”
t0“onion”
t1“Application of 35 kg S ha -1 produced”
e1“maximum bulb yield was obtained with application of sulphur at 35 kg ha -1”
Claim · model-written summary
Gypsum at 35 kg S ha -1 produced 3.8 t ha -1 additional bulb yield over control.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1e0
- Outcome
- bulb yielde0
- Direction
- additionale0
- Value
- 3.8 t ha -1e0
- Qualifier
- gypsume0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 35 kg S ha -1 produced an additional bulb yield of 3.8 t ha -1 in gypsum and 5.4 t ha -1 in gromorsulphur over control”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Gromorsulphur at 35 kg S ha -1 produced 5.4 t ha -1 additional bulb yield over control.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1e0
- Outcome
- bulb yielde0
- Direction
- additionale0
- Value
- 5.4 t ha -1e0
- Qualifier
- gromorsulphure0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 35 kg S ha -1 produced an additional bulb yield of 3.8 t ha -1 in gypsum and 5.4 t ha -1 in gromorsulphur over control”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur use efficiency rose to 35 kg S ha -1 and declined thereafter for both sources.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1e0
- Outcome
- sulphur use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasinge0
- Qualifier
- thereafter decreased in both the sourcese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“sulphur use efficiency of the crop showed an increasing trend up to 35 kg S ha -1 and thereafter decreased in both the sources”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Net return was highest at 35 kg S ha -1 for both sulphur sources.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1e0
- Outcome
- net returne0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“highest net return and benefit cost ratio were achieved with the application of 35 kg S ha -1 in both the sources of sulphur”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Benefit cost ratio was highest at 35 kg S ha -1 for both sulphur sources.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- 35 kg S ha -1e0
- Outcome
- benefit cost ratioe0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“highest net return and benefit cost ratio were achieved with the application of 35 kg S ha -1 in both the sources of sulphur”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Gromorsulphur yielded higher onion growth and bulb yield than gypsum.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- gromorsulphure0
- Outcome
- growth, bulb yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- gypsume0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“gromorsulphur resulted in higher growth, bulb yield, sulphur use efficiency and economics in comparison to gypsum”
t0“onion”
Claim · model-written summary
Gromorsulphur yielded higher sulphur use efficiency and economics than gypsum.
- Taxon
- onionAllium cepat0
- Treatment
- gromorsulphure0
- Outcome
- sulphur use efficiency and economicse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- gypsume0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“gromorsulphur resulted in higher growth, bulb yield, sulphur use efficiency and economics in comparison to gypsum”
t0“onion”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Results differ
37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
41 papers more in this group
See all 45 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.