Abstract
A field experiments was conducted during winter seasons of 2014-15 and 2015-16 at the Agricultural Research Farm, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, New Delhi to study the effect of biofertlizer, herbicides, nitrogen management on crop growth and yield of wheat. The treatment consisted of two biofertilizer viz. No biofertilizer and Azotobacter, two levels of herbicides, viz. no herbicide, Clodinafop-propargyl application in main plot and three times of nitrogen application, viz. Chemical fertilizer (recommended dose of urea), Natural fertilizer + chemical fertilizer (50:50) and Natural fertilizer +chemical fertilizer (25:75) in sub plot treatment, respectively. Inoculation of Azotobacter resulted higher growth attributes, yield attributes, seed yield. Significantly higher value plant height was recorded under Azotobacter inoculated as compared to uninoculated. Dry matter accumulation was higher with Azotobacter inoculated than uninoculated plants. The highest value of these attributes was recorded with the application of Azotobacter which was significantly higher that the control (No biofertilizer) in present experimentation. Inoculation of Azotobacter resulted higher number of grains per spike (58.06 and 60.85) and grain weight (6.71 and 6.89 g) which was significantly more than uninoculated plants. The 1000 seed weight of wheat significantly increased with the application of Azotobacter. The highest seed yield (45.77 and 46.72 q/ha) was recorded with Azotobacter application which was significantly higher than uninoculated control (38.98 and 46.72 q/ha) during 2014-15 and 2015-16, respectively. Similarly straw, biological yield and harvest index of the crop was also improved significantly with Azotobacter application as compared to control. The growth attributes i.e. plant height and dry matter accumulation were found higher in Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DAS while least growth attributes was recorded under untreated control during both the years. The treated plots exhibited significantly higher number of grains per spike (57.14 and 59.87), grain weight per spike (7.05 and 7.23 g) and 1000-grain weight than no weedicide control during respective years. The application of Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 produced significantly higher (45.15 and 46.62 q/ha) grain yield than untreated plots (36.59 and 40.57 q/ha). The nitrogen applied through urea or it was applied in combination with natural sources such as FYM had significant improvement on growth attributes and recorded higher plant height with 25% N applied through natural fertilizer + 75% nitrogen applied through urea recorded higher plant height than the other fertility treatments over the nitrogen applied through 50% natural + 50 % N applied through Urea. The combined application of 75% N by urea along with 25% natural fertilizer increased the number of effective tillers m-2, number of grains per spike, length of spike and the test weight. The combined application of 25% N applied by natural fertilizers + 75 N through urea + micronutrients registered highest (44.47 and 45.94 q/ha) grain yield of wheat during 2014-15 and 2015-16 of study which was significantly higher than the treatments where 50% N through natural + 50% through urea fertilizers were applied.
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter inoculation increased wheat plant height relative to uninoculated plants.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- Azotobacter inoculatede0
- Interactor
- Azotobacter
Azotobactere0symbiont - Outcome
- plant heighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- uninoculatede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significantly higher value plant height was recorded under Azotobacter inoculated as compared to uninoculated.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter inoculation raised dry matter accumulation.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Azotobacter inoculatede0
- Interactor
- AzotobacterAzotobactere0symbiont
- Outcome
- Dry matter accumulatione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- uninoculated plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dry matter accumulation was higher with Azotobacter inoculated than uninoculated plants.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter raised grains per spike to 58.06 and 60.85 in the respective years.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Inoculation of Azotobactere0
- Interactor
- AzotobacterAzotobactere0symbiont
- Outcome
- number of grains per spikee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 58.06 and 60.85e0
- Comparator
- uninoculated plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation of Azotobacter resulted higher number of grains per spike (58.06 and 60.85) and grain weight (6.71 and 6.89 g) which was significantly more than uninoculated plants.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter raised grain weight to 6.71 and 6.89 g.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Inoculation of Azotobactere0
- Interactor
- AzotobacterAzotobactere0symbiont
- Outcome
- grain weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 6.71 and 6.89 ge0
- Comparator
- uninoculated plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Inoculation of Azotobacter resulted higher number of grains per spike (58.06 and 60.85) and grain weight (6.71 and 6.89 g) which was significantly more than uninoculated plants.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter significantly increased wheat 1000 seed weight.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- application of Azotobactere0
- Interactor
- AzotobacterAzotobactere0symbiont
- Outcome
- 1000 seed weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- No biofertilizere1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 1000 seed weight of wheat significantly increased with the application of Azotobacter.”
e1“No biofertilizer and Azotobacter”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter produced the highest seed yield, 45.77 and 46.72 q/ha, versus uninoculated control.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Azotobacter applicatione0
- Interactor
- AzotobacterAzotobactere0symbiont
- Outcome
- seed yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 45.77 and 46.72 q/hae0
- Qualifier
- 38.98 and 46.72 q/hae0
- Comparator
- uninoculated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest seed yield (45.77 and 46.72 q/ha) was recorded with Azotobacter application which was significantly higher than uninoculated control (38.98 and 46.72 q/ha) during 2014-15 and 2015-16, respectively.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter significantly improved straw and biological yield and harvest index.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Azotobacter applicatione0
- Interactor
- AzotobacterAzotobactere0symbiont
- Outcome
- straw, biological yield and harvest indexe0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly straw, biological yield and harvest index of the crop was also improved significantly with Azotobacter application as compared to control.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Clodinafop – Propargyl gave higher plant height and dry matter accumulation than untreated control.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DASe0
- Outcome
- plant height and dry matter accumulatione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth attributes i.e. plant height and dry matter accumulation were found higher in Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DAS while least growth attributes was recorded under untreated control during both the years.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Herbicide-treated wheat had more grains per spike than the control, 57.14 and 59.87.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DASe1
- Outcome
- number of grains per spikee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 57.14 and 59.87e0
- Comparator
- no weedicide controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treated plots exhibited significantly higher number of grains per spike (57.14 and 59.87), grain weight per spike (7.05 and 7.23 g) and 1000-grain weight than no weedicide control during respective years.”
e1“Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DAS”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Herbicide-treated wheat had higher grain weight per spike, 7.05 and 7.23 g.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DASe1
- Outcome
- grain weight per spikee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 7.05 and 7.23 ge0
- Comparator
- no weedicide controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treated plots exhibited significantly higher number of grains per spike (57.14 and 59.87), grain weight per spike (7.05 and 7.23 g) and 1000-grain weight than no weedicide control during respective years.”
e1“Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DAS”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Herbicide-treated wheat had higher 1000-grain weight than the control.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DASe1
- Outcome
- 1000-grain weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- no weedicide controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The treated plots exhibited significantly higher number of grains per spike (57.14 and 59.87), grain weight per spike (7.05 and 7.23 g) and 1000-grain weight than no weedicide control during respective years.”
e1“Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 DAS”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Clodinafop – Propargyl increased grain yield to 45.15 and 46.62 q/ha versus untreated plots.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30e0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 45.15 and 46.62 q/hae0
- Qualifier
- 36.59 and 40.57 q/hae0
- Comparator
- untreated plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The application of Clodinafop – Propargyl 60 g ha-1 at 30 produced significantly higher (45.15 and 46.62 q/ha) grain yield than untreated plots (36.59 and 40.57 q/ha).”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The 25% natural fertilizer plus 75% urea treatment gave higher plant height than other fertility treatments.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 25% N applied through natural fertilizer + 75% nitrogen applied through ureae0
- Outcome
- plant heighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- 50% natural + 50 % N applied through Ureae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“25% N applied through natural fertilizer + 75% nitrogen applied through urea recorded higher plant height than the other fertility treatments over the nitrogen applied through 50% natural + 50 % N applied through Urea.”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined 75% urea nitrogen and 25% natural fertilizer increased effective tillers, grains per spike and spike length.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 75% N by urea along with 25% natural fertilizere0
- Outcome
- number of effective tillers m-2, number of grains per spike, length of spikee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- 50% natural + 50 % N applied through Ureae1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combined application of 75% N by urea along with 25% natural fertilizer increased the number of effective tillers m-2, number of grains per spike, length of spike and the test weight.”
e1“50% natural + 50 % N applied through Urea”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Combined 75% urea nitrogen and 25% natural fertilizer increased test weight.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- 75% N by urea along with 25% natural fertilizere0
- Outcome
- test weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- 50% natural + 50 % N applied through Ureae1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combined application of 75% N by urea along with 25% natural fertilizer increased the number of effective tillers m-2, number of grains per spike, length of spike and the test weight.”
e1“50% natural + 50 % N applied through Urea”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The 25% natural nitrogen, 75% urea and micronutrient treatment gave the highest wheat grain yield, 44.47 and 45.94 q/ha.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- 25% N applied by natural fertilizers + 75 N through urea + micronutrientse0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 44.47 and 45.94 q/hae0
- Comparator
- 50% N through natural + 50% through urea fertilizerse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combined application of 25% N applied by natural fertilizers + 75 N through urea + micronutrients registered highest (44.47 and 45.94 q/ha) grain yield of wheat during 2014-15 and 2015-16 of study which was significantly higher than the treatments where 50% N through natural + 50% through urea fertilizers were applied.”
The same questions in other papers
clodinafop-propargyl · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
41 papers more in this group
See all 45 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 →Azotobacter · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
28 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
25 papers more in this group
See all 29 papers →nitrogen · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
69 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
92 papers more in this group
See all 96 papers →micronutrient · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
70 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →fertilization · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
118 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
150 papers more in this group
See all 154 papers →inoculation · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
475 papers in the same direction as this paper · 55 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
528 papers more in this group
See all 532 papers →nitrogen · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
425 papers in the same direction as this paper · 116 in the opposite direction · 9 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
547 papers more in this group
See all 551 papers →8 of 12 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.