Abstract
This study conducted at the net house of Faculty of Sustainable Agriculture, University Malaysia Sabah, Sandakan. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of incorporated of organic and inorganic fertilizers on growth, yield and eating quality of the local yellow glutinous maize (Zea mays ceratina Kulesh). Biochar and chicken manure, Urea, Triple Single Phosphate (TSP), and Muriate of Potash (MOP)) and BRIS soil were used in this experiment. Four treatments were used namely treatment 1 (control, 120:60:60 NPK), 2 (120:60:30 NPK + organic fertilizers), 3(120:60:90 + organic fertilizers) and 4 (120:60:120 NPK + organic fertilizers). Each treatment applied different rates of potassium but same rate of others organic and inorganic fertilizers except treatment without organic fertilizers. The experimental design was Completely Randomized Design (CRD) with five replications. Data on plant height and numbers of leaf were recorded every one week. Parameters for yield components such as length of the cob, weight of the cob with and without husks, circumference of the cob, number of kernels, 100 grains fresh weight, 100 grains dry weight and sweetness of the corn were taken after harvesting. Nitrogen, hydrogen and carbon analysis also carried out by used of CHN machine. After that, results were analyzed using SAS and the treatment means were compared by Least Significance Difference (LSD) test at s % significant level. In this study, treatment 3 which was the treatment with adequate organic and inorganic had the positive effects on the plant height, circumference of the cob, number of grains, fresh weight of 100 grains, dry weight of 100 grains and sweetness of the maize although this treatment did not showed good effects to others parameters. Therefore, treatment 3 can be considered as the better treatment to improve growth, yield and eating quality to the maize.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Treatment 3 positively affected maize plant height, cob circumference and grain number.
- Treatment
- 120:60:90 + organic fertilizerse1
- Outcome
- plant height, circumference of the cob, number of grainse0
- Direction
- positive effectse0
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment 3 which was the treatment with adequate organic and inorganic had the positive effects on the plant height, circumference of the cob, number of grains, fresh weight of 100 grains, dry weight of 100 grains and sweetness of the maize”
e1“3(120:60:90 + organic fertilizers)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatment 3 positively affected fresh and dry weight of 100 maize grains.
- Treatment
- 120:60:90 + organic fertilizerse1
- Outcome
- fresh weight of 100 grains, dry weight of 100 grainse0
- Direction
- positive effectse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment 3 which was the treatment with adequate organic and inorganic had the positive effects on the plant height, circumference of the cob, number of grains, fresh weight of 100 grains, dry weight of 100 grains and sweetness of the maize”
e1“3(120:60:90 + organic fertilizers)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatment 3 positively affected maize sweetness.
- Treatment
- 120:60:90 + organic fertilizerse1
- Outcome
- sweetness of the maizee0
- Direction
- positive effectse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment 3 which was the treatment with adequate organic and inorganic had the positive effects on the plant height, circumference of the cob, number of grains, fresh weight of 100 grains, dry weight of 100 grains and sweetness of the maize”
e1“3(120:60:90 + organic fertilizers)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatment 3 did not improve the other measured maize parameters.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“this treatment did not showed good effects to others parameters.”
e1“In this study, treatment 3 which was the treatment with adequate organic and inorganic”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend treatment 3 for maize growth, yield and eating quality.
- Outcome
- treatment 3 can be considered as the better treatmente0
- Qualifier
- growth, yield and eating qualitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment 3 can be considered as the better treatment to improve growth, yield and eating quality to the maize.”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · organism · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
136 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
158 papers more in this group
See all 162 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3,484 papers in the same direction as this paper · 338 in the opposite direction · 85 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 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.