Abstract
Under rainfed conditions, farmers rarely use micro-nutrients for crop production, due to which soils become deficient especially in zinc (Zn), Iron (Fe) and boron (B). Secondly, farmers apply nutrients solely through soil application but scarcity/less availability of moisture makes the nutrients unavailable for crop plants. Under such circumstances, foliar application of micronutrients may play a key role for better crop growth and yield. Therefore, this on-farm testing was conducted to investigate the role of Zn, Fe and B application alone and in combination through soil and foliar application methods on growth, yield and net returns of maize grown under rainfed conditions. Results showed that combined application of Zn, Fe and B on foliage has improved the grain yield due to substantial expansion in entire yield related traits. Combined foliar application of Zn, Fe and B harvested 16.96 per cent and 25.27 per cent more grain yield (67.25 and 69.69 q ha- during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively) than farmers practice (57.50 and 55.63 q ha-1 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively). Similar trend was observed in pooled data also [21.03 % higher grain yield (68.47 q ha-1) than farmers practice (56.57 q ha-1)]. Higher gross return, net returns and benefit: cost ratio was also obtained by soil and foliar application of Zn, Fe and B. It has improved the gross income (Rs. 94822 and Rs. 99305 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively), net income (Rs. 76622 and Rs. 81055 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively) and benefit: cost ratio (BCR) (5.21 and 5.44 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively) against farmers practice and similar trend was noticed in pooled data also (Rs. 97064, Rs. 78839 and 5.21 of gross return, net return and B:C ratio, respectively). In conclusion, application of RDF along with soil and foliar application of micronutrients has improved maize yield due to significant expansion in yield related traits and thus improved net returns of maize grown under rainfed conditions of Suttakote village of Hirekerur taluk, Haveri district.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar Zn, Fe and B increased grain yield by 16.96% in 2016-17.
- Treatment
- Combined foliar application of Zn, Fe and Be0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 16.96 per cente0
- Qualifier
- 2016-17e0
- Comparator
- farmers practicee0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Combined foliar application of Zn, Fe and B harvested 16.96 per cent and 25.27 per cent more grain yield (67.25 and 69.69 q ha- during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively) than farmers practice (57.50 and 55.63 q ha-1 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively).”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar Zn, Fe and B increased grain yield by 25.27% in 2017-18.
- Treatment
- Combined foliar application of Zn, Fe and Be0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 25.27 per cente0
- Qualifier
- 2017-18e0
- Comparator
- farmers practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Combined foliar application of Zn, Fe and B harvested 16.96 per cent and 25.27 per cent more grain yield (67.25 and 69.69 q ha- during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively) than farmers practice (57.50 and 55.63 q ha-1 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively).”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Pooled grain yield was 21.03% above farmer practice.
- Treatment
- foliar application of Zn, Fe and Be1
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 21.03 %e0
- Qualifier
- 68.47 q ha-1e0
- Comparator
- farmers practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“21.03 % higher grain yield (68.47 q ha-1) than farmers practice (56.57 q ha-1)”
t0“Maize”
e1“Combined foliar application of Zn, Fe and B”
Claim · model-written summary
Zn, Fe and B increased yield-related traits.
- Treatment
- combined application of Zn, Fe and B on foliagee0
- Outcome
- yield related traitse0
- Direction
- expansione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“combined application of Zn, Fe and B on foliage has improved the grain yield due to substantial expansion in entire yield related traits”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil and foliar Zn, Fe and B increased gross return, net returns and benefit:cost ratio.
- Treatment
- soil and foliar application of Zn, Fe and Be0
- Outcome
- gross return, net returns and benefit: cost ratioe0
- Direction
- Highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher gross return, net returns and benefit: cost ratio was also obtained by soil and foliar application of Zn, Fe and B.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gross income under micronutrients was Rs. 94822 in 2016-17.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“gross income (Rs. 94822 and Rs. 99305 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively)”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gross income under micronutrients was Rs. 99305 in 2017-18.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“gross income (Rs. 94822 and Rs. 99305 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively)”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Net income under micronutrients was Rs. 76622 in 2016-17.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“net income (Rs. 76622 and Rs. 81055 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively)”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Net income under micronutrients was Rs. 81055 in 2017-18.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“net income (Rs. 76622 and Rs. 81055 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively)”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BCR under micronutrients was 5.21 in 2016-17.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“benefit: cost ratio (BCR) (5.21 and 5.44 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively)”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
BCR under micronutrients was 5.44 in 2017-18.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“benefit: cost ratio (BCR) (5.21 and 5.44 during 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively)”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Pooled gross return was Rs. 97064.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rs. 97064, Rs. 78839 and 5.21 of gross return, net return and B:C ratio, respectively”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Pooled net return was Rs. 78839.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rs. 97064, Rs. 78839 and 5.21 of gross return, net return and B:C ratio, respectively”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Pooled B:C ratio was 5.21.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rs. 97064, Rs. 78839 and 5.21 of gross return, net return and B:C ratio, respectively”
t0“Maize”
The same questions in other papers
iron atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
61 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
69 papers more in this group
See all 73 papers →zinc atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
390 papers in the same direction as this paper · 47 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
437 papers more in this group
See all 441 papers →application · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
574 papers in the same direction as this paper · 42 in the opposite direction · 12 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
625 papers more in this group
See all 629 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.