Paper · 2022 · The Journal of Phytopharmacology

Response of Chemical Fertilizers and INM on Productivity of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and Properties of Soil

Atul Kushwaha; SK Tripathi

6
claims
11
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted during rabi season of (2020-21) on wheat at Research Farm of Kulbhaskar Ashram Post Graduate College, Prayagraj (UP), to find out the Response of Chemical Fertilizers and INM on Productivity of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), and Properties of Soil. The experiment laid out in Randomized Block Design (RBD) with eleven treatments and three replications. The results revealed that the highest plant height was recorded in treatment T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB), which was significantly superior over treatment T3, T4 and T5. The maximum yield attributing characters (number of spikes per m2, spike length, number of grains per spike and test weight), and yield (grain and straw), were increased with treatment receiving 75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB (T11). The maximum enhancement in grain and straw yield of wheat was recorded in treatment T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB), which was significantly superior over T2, T3, T4, T5, T8 and T9. The maximum protein content (13.18%), in grain of wheat was found in treatment T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha-1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB), The application of FYM with Chemical Fertilizers and Bio-fertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB) improved in soil pH and EC and also increased the Soil Organic Carbon and Available N, P & K in soil after the harvest of crop. The treatment (T11). was found best in respect of soil properties.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

T11 produced the greatest wheat plant height and exceeded T3, T4 and T5 significantly.

Treatment
T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB)e0
Outcome
plant heighte0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
treatment T3, T4 and T5e0

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

“The results revealed that the highest plant height was recorded in treatment T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB), which was significantly superior over treatment T3, T4 and T5.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 385–590 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 60–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T11 increased the listed spike and grain yield attributes.

Treatment
75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB (T11)e0
Outcome
number of spikes per m2, spike length, number of grains per spike and test weighte0
Direction
increasede0

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

“The maximum yield attributing characters (number of spikes per m2, spike length, number of grains per spike and test weight), and yield (grain and straw), were increased with treatment receiving 75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB (T11).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–851 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 60–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

T11 increased grain and straw yield and significantly exceeded six other treatments.

Treatment
T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB)e0
Outcome
grain and straw yielde0
Direction
maximum enhancemente0
Comparator
T2, T3, T4, T5, T8 and T9e0

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

“The maximum enhancement in grain and straw yield of wheat was recorded in treatment T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB), which was significantly superior over T2, T3, T4, T5, T8 and T9.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 852–1066 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T11 gave maximum grain protein content of 13.18%.

Organ / stage
graine0
Treatment
T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha-1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB)e0
Outcome
protein contente0
Direction
maximume0
Value
13.18%e0

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

“The maximum protein content (13.18%), in grain of wheat was found in treatment T11 (75% RDF +5 t ha-1 FYM +20 kg ha1 ZnSO4 +Azotobacter and PSB)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1067–1211 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

FYM with chemical and biological fertilizers improved soil pH and EC.

Treatment
FYM with Chemical Fertilizers and Bio-fertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB)e0
Outcome
soil pH and ECe0
Direction
improvede0

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

“The application of FYM with Chemical Fertilizers and Bio-fertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB) improved in soil pH and EC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1213–1330 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 60–65 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

FYM with chemical and biological fertilizers increased soil organic carbon and available N, P and K after harvest.

Treatment
FYM with Chemical Fertilizers and Bio-fertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB)e1
Outcome
Soil Organic Carbon and Available N, P & K in soile0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
after the harvest of crope0

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

“increased the Soil Organic Carbon and Available N, P & K in soil after the harvest of crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1340–1430 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 60–65 · show in text ↑
e1

“The application of FYM with Chemical Fertilizers and Bio-fertilizers (Azotobacter and PSB) improved in soil pH and EC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1213–1330 · show in text ↑

zinc sulfate · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

33 papers: 30 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

29 papers more in this group

See all 33 papers →

Azotobacter · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

88 papers: 87 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

84 papers more in this group

See all 88 papers →

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

100 papers: 98 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

96 papers more in this group

See all 100 papers →

Azotobacter · soil: chemistry · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

Azotobacter · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

zinc sulfate · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

zinc sulfate · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

13 papers: 13 positive, 0 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

Azotobacter · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

13 papers: 13 positive, 0 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

8 of 15 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.