Paper · 2019 · Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry

Influence of biofortification of zinc and iron on yield and economics of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)

GP Banjara; Sanjay Kumar Majgahe

4
claims
6
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The present investigation “Influence of biofortification of zinc and iron on yield and economics of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) was carried out during Rabi season in 2016-17 and 2017-18 at Instructional Cum Research Farm of IGKV, Raipur (Chhattisgarh). The soil of experimental field was clayey (Vertisols) in texture, locally known as “Kanhar” which was low, medium and high in available N, P2O5 and K2O, respectively. The experiment was laid out in Split Plot Design with four replications. The experiment consists of two genotypes and six different nutrient levels treatment combinations. It was found significantly difference between both genotypes and all nutrient levels treatment. The chickpea genotype Indira chana-1was found significantly higher in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over the genotype Vaibhav during both the years and on mean basis except stover yield (2016-17) and harvest index (2017-18). In all nutrient levels treatment is significantly difference except stover yield during both the years and on mean basis. Treatment RDF (20:50:20) + 0.5% ZnSO4 and 0.1% FeSO4 through foliar application in pre flowering and pod development stage recorded significantly highest in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over all nutrient levels treatment followed by treatment RDF (20:50:20) + Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha at basal and lowest in RDF (20:50:20) (Standard control) during both the years and on mean basis.

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 4

Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The chickpea genotype Indira chana-1was found significantly higher in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over the genotype Vaibhav during both the years and on mean basis except stover yield (2016-17) and harvest index (2017-18).

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume0
Material
Indira chana-1e0
Outcome
seed yield, stover yield, harvest indexe0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
except stover yield (2016-17) and harvest index (2017-18)e0
Comparator
Vaibhave0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The chickpea genotype Indira chana-1was found significantly higher in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over the genotype Vaibhav during both the years and on mean basis except stover yield (2016-17) and harvest index (2017-18).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 690–964 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The chickpea genotype Indira chana-1was found significantly higher in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over the genotype Vaibhav during both the years and on mean basis except stover yield (2016-17) and harvest index (2017-18).

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinume0
Material
Indira chana-1e0
Outcome
gross return, net return and B:C Ratioe0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
Vaibhave0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The chickpea genotype Indira chana-1was found significantly higher in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over the genotype Vaibhav during both the years and on mean basis except stover yield (2016-17) and harvest index (2017-18).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 690–964 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatment RDF (20:50:20) + 0.5% ZnSO4 and 0.1% FeSO4 through foliar application in pre flowering and pod development stage recorded significantly highest in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over all nutrient levels treatment followed by treatment RDF (20:50:20) + Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha at basal and lowest in RDF (20:50:20) (Standard control) during both the years and on mean basis.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
RDF (20:50:20) + 0.5% ZnSO4 and 0.1% FeSO4 through foliar application in pre flowering and pod development stagee0
Outcome
seed yield, stover yield, harvest indexe0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
RDF (20:50:20) (Standard control)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Treatment RDF (20:50:20) + 0.5% ZnSO4 and 0.1% FeSO4 through foliar application in pre flowering and pod development stage recorded significantly highest in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over all nutrient levels treatment followed by treatment RDF (20:50:20) + Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha at basal and lowest in RDF (20:50:20) (Standard control) during both the years and on mean basis.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1087–1532 · show in text ↑
t0

“chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatment RDF (20:50:20) + 0.5% ZnSO4 and 0.1% FeSO4 through foliar application in pre flowering and pod development stage recorded significantly highest in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over all nutrient levels treatment followed by treatment RDF (20:50:20) + Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha at basal and lowest in RDF (20:50:20) (Standard control) during both the years and on mean basis.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
RDF (20:50:20) + 0.5% ZnSO4 and 0.1% FeSO4 through foliar application in pre flowering and pod development stagee0
Outcome
gross return, net return and B:C Ratioe0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
RDF (20:50:20) (Standard control)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Treatment RDF (20:50:20) + 0.5% ZnSO4 and 0.1% FeSO4 through foliar application in pre flowering and pod development stage recorded significantly highest in seed yield, stover yield, harvest index, gross return, net return and B:C Ratio over all nutrient levels treatment followed by treatment RDF (20:50:20) + Soil application of ZnSO4 @ 25 kg/ha at basal and lowest in RDF (20:50:20) (Standard control) during both the years and on mean basis.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1087–1532 · show in text ↑
t0

“chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–81 · show in text ↑

zinc sulfate · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results differ

34 papers: 33 positive, 1 negative or no effect

32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

30 papers more in this group

See all 34 papers →

iron(2+) sulfate (anhydrous) · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

12 papers: 12 positive, 0 negative or no effect

11 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

stage · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

47 papers: 42 positive, 5 negative or no effect

41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 papers →

application · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

177 papers: 173 positive, 4 negative or no effect

172 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

173 papers more in this group

See all 177 papers →

fertilization · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

345 papers: 326 positive, 19 negative or no effect

325 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

341 papers more in this group

See all 345 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.