Paper · 2018 · International Journal of Chemical Studies

Impact of biofertigation on growth and yield of banana cv. Ney poovan

K. Vanilarasu; J. Suresh; K. Soorianathasundaram; et al.

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Banana requires large amounts of chemical fertilizers which are costly and can be hazardous to the environments when used excessively. Application of bioinoculants along with commercially available fertilizers in crop production can play a vital role in biological nitrogen fixation, synthesis of phytohormones, mineralization and release of nutrients when crop required at appropriate growth stages, nutrient use efficiency and minimum deleterious effects on soil fertility. A field experiment was conducted to gain information on the efficacy of bioinoculants along with commercial fertilizers on growth and yield of banana cv. Ney Poovan. The results revealed that among the different treatments, 100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Pseudomonas fluorescens through fertigation followed by the treatment received 100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Bacillus subtilis through fertigation recorded better values for growth and yield characteristics. Hence, the application of required nutrients through split application (weekly interval) along with PGPR (Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis) at 3rd, 5th and 7th MAP registered better values in terms of growth and yield attributes rather than soil application of nutrients.

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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertigation with 100 % RDF, Azospirillun and Pseudomonas fluorescens gave the best growth and yield characteristics.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Pseudomonas fluorescens through fertigatione0
Interactor
Pseudomonas fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont
Second interactor
Azospirillune0symbiont
Outcome
growth and yield characteristicse0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Bacillus subtilis through fertigatione0

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

Pseudomonas fluorescens
Pseudomonas fluorescens · InteractorNinjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Pseudomonas fluorescens through fertigation followed by the treatment received 100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Bacillus subtilis through fertigation recorded better values for growth and yield characteristics”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 700–952 · show in text ↑
t0

“banana cv. Ney poovan”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 48–69 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertigation with 100 % RDF, Azospirillun and Bacillus subtilis ranked next for growth and yield.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Bacillus subtilis through fertigatione0
Interactor
Bacillus subtilisBacillus subtilise0symbiont
Second interactor
Azospirillune0symbiont
Outcome
growth and yield characteristicse0
Direction
bettere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Bacillus subtilis
Bacillus subtilis · InteractorY tambe (original uploader) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Pseudomonas fluorescens through fertigation followed by the treatment received 100 % RDF along with Azospirillun and Bacillus subtilis through fertigation recorded better values for growth and yield characteristics”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 700–952 · show in text ↑
t0

“banana cv. Ney poovan”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 48–69 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weekly split nutrient application with PGPR at 3rd, 5th and 7th MAP improved growth and yield attributes relative to soil nutrient application.

Taxon
bananat0
Treatment
application of required nutrients through split application (weekly interval) along with PGPR (Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis) at 3rd, 5th and 7th MAPe0
Interactor
Pseudomonas fluorescensPseudomonas fluorescense0symbiont
Second interactor
Bacillus subtilisBacillus subtilise0symbiont
Outcome
growth and yield attributese0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
soil application of nutrientse0

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

Pseudomonas fluorescens
Pseudomonas fluorescens · InteractorNinjatacoshell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Bacillus subtilis
Bacillus subtilis · Second interactorY tambe (original uploader) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“application of required nutrients through split application (weekly interval) along with PGPR (Pseudomonas fluorescens and Bacillus subtilis) at 3rd, 5th and 7th MAP registered better values in terms of growth and yield attributes rather than soil application of nutrients”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 965–1237 · show in text ↑
t0

“banana cv. Ney poovan”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 48–69 · show in text ↑

Pseudomonas fluorescens · yield · MusaResults agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

inoculation · yield · MusaPositive and negative results

28 papers: 26 positive, 2 negative or no effect

25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

24 papers more in this group

See all 28 papers →

fertilization · yield · MusaPositive and negative results

128 papers: 118 positive, 10 negative or no effect

117 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

124 papers more in this group

See all 128 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.