Paper · 2019 · International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences

Performance of Zero-till Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and Weed Species as Influenced by Residue and Weed Management Techniques in Rice based Cropping System

Rakesh Kumar; U.P. Singh; Gaurav Mahajan

3
claims
4
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during 2005-06 to 2006-07 at Varanasi to find out the effect of three residue management practices viz. R1 (Residue Removal), R2 (Residue Retention alone), R3 (Residue Retention with Trichoderma) and four weed management treatments viz. W1 (Control), W2 (Hand weeding at 30 & 45 DAS), W3 (Isoproturon +2,4-D (1.0+0.5 ha-1 at 30 DAS), W4 (Fenoxaprop 120 g a.i. ha-1 fb Metsulfuron 4g a.i. ha-1 ) on weeds and productivity of zero-till wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend Fiori & Poal) in rice-wheat cropping system during the winter (rabi) season. Wheat grown under rice wheat cropping system with residue retention with Trichoderma application produced 8.2 and 6.8 % higher grain and 7.3 and 6.2 % straw yield over residue removal treatment during both the year of experimentations. Out of all residue management approaches under test, residue management alone along with isoproturon + 2, 4-D application for weed control gave higher net returns during the course of above study.

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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue retention with Trichoderma increased wheat grain yield by 8.2 and 6.8 percent over residue removal in the two years.

Treatment
residue retention with Trichoderma applicatione0
Interactor
TrichodermaTrichodermae0symbiont
Outcome
graine0
Direction
highere0
Value
8.2 and 6.8 %e0
Comparator
residue removal treatmente0

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 ↗
Trichoderma
Trichoderma · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Systematic Botany and Mycology Laboratory, [1] · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wheat grown under rice wheat cropping system with residue retention with Trichoderma application produced 8.2 and 6.8 % higher grain and 7.3 and 6.2 % straw yield over residue removal treatment during both the year of experimentations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 578–812 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue retention with Trichoderma increased wheat straw yield by 7.3 and 6.2 percent over residue removal in the two years.

Treatment
residue retention with Trichoderma applicatione0
Interactor
TrichodermaTrichodermae0symbiont
Outcome
straw yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
7.3 and 6.2 %e0
Comparator
residue removal treatmente0

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 ↗
Trichoderma
Trichoderma · Interactor · picture of the genus (one of its species)US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Systematic Botany and Mycology Laboratory, [1] · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wheat grown under rice wheat cropping system with residue retention with Trichoderma application produced 8.2 and 6.8 % higher grain and 7.3 and 6.2 % straw yield over residue removal treatment during both the year of experimentations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 578–812 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Residue management alone with isoproturon and 2,4-D gave higher net returns.

Treatment
residue management alone along with isoproturon + 2, 4-D applicatione0
Outcome
net returnse0
Direction
highere0

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

“residue management alone along with isoproturon + 2, 4-D application for weed control gave higher net returns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 867–976 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–30 · show in text ↑

isoproturon · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

89 papers: 75 positive, 14 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

85 papers more in this group

See all 89 papers →

2,4-D · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

116 papers: 78 positive, 38 negative or no effect

77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

112 papers more in this group

See all 116 papers →

Trichoderma · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

11 papers: 11 positive, 0 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

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

322 papers: 281 positive, 41 negative or no effect

280 papers in the same direction as this paper · 35 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

318 papers more in this group

See all 322 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.