Paper · 2020 · International Journal of Chemical Studies

Influence of different organic nutrient sources on nodulation and economics of lentil (Lens culinaris L.) under certified organic production system

Bhooma Venkata Sai Prathap; Umesha; C Shiva Kumar M; et al.

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The field experiment was conducted during Rabi 2019 at SMOF (SHIATS Organic Modal Farm). Department of Agronomy, SHUATS, Prayagraj (UP). The soil of the experimental field is sandy loam in texture, nearly neutral in soil reaction (pH 7.6), the available N, P, K fertilizer is applied through organic fertilizers i.e. Vermicompost and Poultry manure. The treatment consisted of application of Vermicompost and Poultry manure in different levels viz: whose effect is observed on IPL-316. The experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design with nine treatments which are replicated thrice. The treatment with Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/ha shown significantly higher number of nodules (18.85 at 60 DAS) and growth parameters. The maximum gross return (123793.3 ₹/ha), net return (77273.33 ₹/ha) and benefit cost ratio (1.55) is recorded in treatment with Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/ha.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined 2.5 t/ha vermicompost and 2.5 t/ha poultry manure treatment produced significantly more nodules, 18.85 at 60 DAS.

Taxon
lentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/hae0
Outcome
number of nodulese0
Direction
highere0
Value
18.85 at 60 DASe0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The treatment with Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/ha shown significantly higher number of nodules (18.85 at 60 DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–720 · show in text ↑
t0

“lentil (Lens culinaris L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined fertilizer treatment significantly increased growth parameters.

Taxon
lentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/hae0
Outcome
growth parameterse0
Direction
highere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The treatment with Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/ha shown significantly higher number of nodules (18.85 at 60 DAS) and growth parameters.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–743 · show in text ↑
t0

“lentil (Lens culinaris L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined fertilizer treatment gave the maximum gross return of 123793.3 ₹/ha.

Taxon
lentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/hae0
Outcome
gross returne0
Direction
maximume0
Value
123793.3 ₹/hae0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The maximum gross return (123793.3 ₹/ha), net return (77273.33 ₹/ha) and benefit cost ratio (1.55) is recorded in treatment with Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/ha.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–921 · show in text ↑
t0

“lentil (Lens culinaris L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined fertilizer treatment gave the maximum net return of 77273.33 ₹/ha.

Taxon
lentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/hae0
Outcome
net returne0
Direction
maximume0
Value
77273.33 ₹/hae0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The maximum gross return (123793.3 ₹/ha), net return (77273.33 ₹/ha) and benefit cost ratio (1.55) is recorded in treatment with Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/ha.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–921 · show in text ↑
t0

“lentil (Lens culinaris L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined fertilizer treatment gave the maximum benefit cost ratio of 1.55.

Taxon
lentilLens culinarist0
Treatment
Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/hae0
Outcome
benefit cost ratioe0
Direction
maximume0
Value
1.55e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Lens culinaris
Lens culinaris · TaxonUser:Justinc · CC BY-SA 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The maximum gross return (123793.3 ₹/ha), net return (77273.33 ₹/ha) and benefit cost ratio (1.55) is recorded in treatment with Vermicompost 2.5 t/ha + Poultry manure 2.5 t/ha.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–921 · show in text ↑
t0

“lentil (Lens culinaris L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–105 · show in text ↑

fertilization · yield · Lens culinaris (lentil)Results differ

99 papers: 86 positive, 13 negative or no effect

85 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

95 papers more in this group

See all 99 papers →

fertilization · symbiosis · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 18 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. positive

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

fertilization · growth · Lens culinaris (lentil)Positive and negative results

26 papers: 24 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 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.