Abstract
Field experiment was conducted on effect of tiilage, residue and residual of nitrogen management practices at Institute Research Farm of ICAR – National Rice Research Institute, Cuttack (Odisha) during the rabi of 2016-17 and 2017-18 years. The experiment was laid out in split – split plot design with three replications. The results revealed that significantly higher nutrient uptake (N, P and K), partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium), protein yield and productivity of maize was recorded under treatment R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1) as compared R1 – RDF + no residue, but protein content was found non – significant influence by different treatment of maize.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
R3 residue mulching gave significantly higher nutrient uptake (N, P and K) than R1 without residue.
- Treatment
- R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1)e0
- Outcome
- nutrient uptake (N, P and K)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- R1 – RDF + no residuee0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly higher nutrient uptake (N, P and K), partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium), protein yield and productivity of maize was recorded under treatment R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1) as compared R1 – RDF + no residue, but protein content was found non – significant influence by different treatment of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
R3 residue mulching gave significantly higher partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium) than R1 without residue.
- Treatment
- R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1)e0
- Outcome
- partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- R1 – RDF + no residuee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly higher nutrient uptake (N, P and K), partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium), protein yield and productivity of maize was recorded under treatment R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1) as compared R1 – RDF + no residue, but protein content was found non – significant influence by different treatment of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
R3 residue mulching gave significantly higher protein yield than R1 without residue.
- Treatment
- R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1)e0
- Outcome
- protein yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- R1 – RDF + no residuee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly higher nutrient uptake (N, P and K), partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium), protein yield and productivity of maize was recorded under treatment R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1) as compared R1 – RDF + no residue, but protein content was found non – significant influence by different treatment of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
R3 residue mulching gave significantly higher productivity of maize than R1 without residue.
- Treatment
- R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1)e0
- Outcome
- productivity of maizee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- R1 – RDF + no residuee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly higher nutrient uptake (N, P and K), partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium), protein yield and productivity of maize was recorded under treatment R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1) as compared R1 – RDF + no residue, but protein content was found non – significant influence by different treatment of maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Protein content did not differ significantly among maize treatments.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“significantly higher nutrient uptake (N, P and K), partial factor productivity (nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium), protein yield and productivity of maize was recorded under treatment R3 – RDF + residue mulching (6 t ha-1) as compared R1 – RDF + no residue, but protein content was found non – significant influence by different treatment of maize”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →mulching · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →fertilization · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
235 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
258 papers more in this group
See all 262 papers →mulching · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
360 papers more in this group
See all 364 papers →fertilization · nutrient: content · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1,025 papers in the same direction as this paper · 127 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
1,160 papers more in this group
See all 1,164 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.