Abstract
A field experiment was conducted to study the “Impact of Microbial Inoculants on Growth and Yield of Tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.) under temperate conditions”, during Kharif 2017 at Experimental Farm, Division of Basic Sciences & Humanities, Faculty of Agriculture and Regional Research Station, Wadura, Sopore, SKUAST-K, to evaluate the effect of various microbial inoculants on growth and yield parameters of tomato. The experiment was laid in Randomized complete Block Design (RCBD) with three replications which consisted of seven inoculants viz; Azotobacter sp., Azospirillum sp., Phosphorous Solubilizing Bacteria (PSB), Potassium Solubilizing Bacteria (KSB), Vesicular Arbuscular Mycorrhiza (VAM) and co-inoculation of VAM+ PSB and VAM+ KSB and control. Various growth and yield parameters viz., plant height, no. of leaves, root length, dry matter accumulation, average fruit weight, at various intervals responded significantly to all the microbial inoculants. The performance of microbial inoculants were evaluated individually and in combination with one other in contrast to control for screening the best microbial inoculants. The results depicted that among all the microbial inoculants, Azotobacter sp. followed by Azospirillum proved superior than rest of the inoculants in terms of improving various growth, quality and yield attributes viz. maximum plant height (45.9 cm), No. of leaves (248.2), dry matter accumulation (282.2g), average fruit weight (50.8g), root length (33.2cm) and yield (2.01 kg/plant) respectively. For number of fruits, Azospirillum sp. gave best results (40.83) followed by Azotobacter (40.7). Therefore, from the present investigation it can be concluded that among all the inoculants, Azotobacter sp. proved superior for increasing all the growth, yield and quality parameters of the tomato crop followed by Azospirillum sp .
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Microbial inoculants significantly affected tomato growth and yield parameters.
Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“plant height, no. of leaves, root length, dry matter accumulation, average fruit weight, at various intervals responded significantly to all the microbial inoculants”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter gave maximum plant height of 45.9 cm.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- Azotobacter sp.e0
- Interactor
- Azotobacter sp.
Azotobactere0other - Outcome
- plant heighte0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 45.9 cme0
- Comparator
- rest of the inoculantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“Azotobacter sp. followed by Azospirillum proved superior than rest of the inoculants in terms of improving various growth, quality and yield attributes viz. maximum plant height (45.9 cm)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter gave 248.2 leaves.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- No. of leavese0
- Value
- 248.2e0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“No. of leaves (248.2)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter gave dry matter accumulation of 282.2g.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulatione0
- Value
- 282.2ge0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“dry matter accumulation (282.2g)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter gave average fruit weight of 50.8g.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- average fruit weighte0
- Value
- 50.8ge0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“average fruit weight (50.8g)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter gave root length of 33.2cm.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- root lengthe0
- Value
- 33.2cme0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“root length (33.2cm)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter gave yield of 2.01 kg/plant.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Value
- 2.01 kg/plante0
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“yield (2.01 kg/plant)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azospirillum gave the highest fruit count, 40.83.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Azospirillum sp.e0
- Interactor
- Azospirillum sp.
Azospirillume0other - Outcome
- number of fruitse0
- Direction
- beste0
- Value
- 40.83e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“For number of fruits, Azospirillum sp. gave best results (40.83)”
Claim · model-written summary
Azotobacter ranked second for fruit count at 40.7.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Azotobactere0
- Interactor
- AzotobacterAzotobactere0other
- Value
- 40.7e0
Not reportedComparatorOutcomeDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“tomato”
e0“followed by Azotobacter (40.7)”
The same questions in other papers
Azospirillum · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
9 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →Azotobacter · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree
18 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 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.