Paper · 2020 · Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

Efficacy of sources and application mode of micronutrients on dry matter accumulation, productivity of wheat and residual organic carbon status in sandy loam soil

Anand Singh; U.P. Shahi; B.P. Dhyani; et al.

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The application of NPK for crop production is not quite enough for higher and quality crop production as well as soil health so balance fertilization with combination of macro and micronutrients application is much important. Selection of suitable nutrient sources, quantity, method and time of application are equally important to get higher yield with maintaining soil quality and environment. Considering this point, a field experiment was conducted following the 4R Nutrient Stewardship to evaluate the effect of different sources of micronutrients (Zn, Mn and B) fertilizers and their mode of application along with NPK on wheat crop during rabi season of 2017–18 and 2018–19 at the Crop Research Centre, Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel University of Agriculture and Technology, Meerut, Uttar Pradesh, India. The maximum dry matter accumulation at each sampling interval was found with RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanite with the highest grain (4.25 t ha-1), straw (5.89 t ha-1) and biological yield (10.14 t ha-1), followed by RDF + foliar application of Zn HEDP + EDTA Mn + DOT. The application of RDF + foliar application of Zn HEDP + EDTA Mn + DOT resulted in a highest harvest index (HI) 42.18. Organic carbon, essential factor for soil conservation was also maximum with application of RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP + MnSO4 + Colemanite during both years while. The foliar application of any single micronutrient with RDF improved the parameters considerably over RDF.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil Zn HEDP, MnSO4 and Colemanite with RDF gave maximum wheat dry matter accumulation.

Treatment
RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanitee1
Outcome
dry matter accumulatione1
Direction
maximume1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“wheat crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–638 · show in text ↑
e1

“maximum dry matter accumulation at each sampling interval was found with RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanite”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 811–936 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same soil application gave the highest grain yield, 4.25 t ha-1.

Treatment
RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanitee1
Outcome
graine1
Direction
higheste1
Value
4.25 t ha-1e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“wheat crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–638 · show in text ↑
e1

“RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanite with the highest grain (4.25 t ha-1), straw (5.89 t ha-1) and biological yield (10.14 t ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 884–1030 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same soil application gave the highest straw yield, 5.89 t ha-1.

Treatment
RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanitee1
Outcome
strawe1
Direction
higheste1
Value
5.89 t ha-1e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“wheat crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–638 · show in text ↑
e1

“RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanite with the highest grain (4.25 t ha-1), straw (5.89 t ha-1) and biological yield (10.14 t ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 884–1030 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same soil application gave the highest biological yield, 10.14 t ha-1.

Treatment
RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanitee1
Outcome
biological yielde1
Direction
higheste1
Value
10.14 t ha-1e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“wheat crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–638 · show in text ↑
e1

“RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP+ MnSO4+ Colemanite with the highest grain (4.25 t ha-1), straw (5.89 t ha-1) and biological yield (10.14 t ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 884–1030 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar Zn HEDP, EDTA Mn and DOT with RDF gave the highest harvest index, 42.18.

Treatment
RDF + foliar application of Zn HEDP + EDTA Mn + DOTe1
Outcome
harvest indexe1
Direction
higheste1
Value
42.18e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“wheat crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–638 · show in text ↑
e1

“RDF + foliar application of Zn HEDP + EDTA Mn + DOT resulted in a highest harvest index (HI) 42.18”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1116–1214 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil Zn HEDP, MnSO4 and Colemanite with RDF gave maximum soil organic carbon in both years.

Treatment
RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP + MnSO4 + Colemanitee1
Outcome
Organic carbone1
Direction
maximume1
Qualifier
during both yearse1

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“wheat crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–638 · show in text ↑
e1

“Organic carbon, essential factor for soil conservation was also maximum with application of RDF + soil application of Zn HEDP + MnSO4 + Colemanite during both years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1216–1380 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar application of any single micronutrient with RDF improved the measured parameters over RDF alone.

Treatment
foliar application of any single micronutrient with RDFe1
Outcome
parameterse1
Direction
improvede1
Comparator
RDFe1

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“wheat crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 628–638 · show in text ↑
e1

“foliar application of any single micronutrient with RDF improved the parameters considerably over RDF”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1392–1493 · show in text ↑

zinc atom · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

14 papers: 11 positive, 3 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

manganese atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

65 papers: 61 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

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

61 papers more in this group

See all 65 papers →

zinc atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

511 papers: 456 positive, 55 negative or no effect

455 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

507 papers more in this group

See all 511 papers →

ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

etidronic acid · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

application · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

fertilization · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

214 papers: 190 positive, 24 negative or no effect

189 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

210 papers more in this group

See all 214 papers →

application · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

877 papers: 795 positive, 82 negative or no effect

794 papers in the same direction as this paper · 75 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

873 papers more in this group

See all 877 papers →

8 of 9 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.