Paper · 2023 · International Journal of Plant & Soil Science

Standardization of Management Strategy for Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) under Different Levels of Crop Residue Retention in Conservation Agriculture

Ganesh Malgaya; A. K. Vishwakarma; S. S. Kushwah; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted at ICAR- Indian Institute of Soil Science (IISS), Bhopal (Madhya Pradesh) to evaluate the impact of different levels of crop residue retention and herbicidal weed control measures on weed dynamics, crop growth and yield characteristics of chickpea crop under conservation agriculture. Data were recorded on weed study, crop growth and yield characters of chickpea. Results indicate that pre-emergence herbicide application treatments (H1 and H2) were found to be effective in reducing weed density at 30 DAS (63.56%) as compared to post emergence treatments which were applied after recording observations on weed density at 30 DAS. It has been observed that post emergence application of imazethapyr @ 25 g a.i. ha-1 was found to restrict crop growth for a period of 10-15 days as compared to pre-emergence treatments. The results on crop growth and yield parameters revealed that higher residue retention level treatment (90% crop residue retention) recorded significantly higher plant height (54.81cm), dry matter plant-1 (18.39 g plant-1), number of pods plant-1 (36.46), seeds plant-1 (47.11), seed yield (1202 kg ha-1) and straw yield (2916 kg ha-1) as compared to no crop residue retention.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-emergence herbicides reduced weed density at 30 DAS by 63.56% relative to post-emergence treatments.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
pre-emergence herbicide application treatments (H1 and H2)e0
Interactor
weede0weed
Outcome
weed densitye0
Direction
reducinge0
Value
63.56%e0
Comparator
post emergence treatmentse0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“pre-emergence herbicide application treatments (H1 and H2) were found to be effective in reducing weed density at 30 DAS (63.56%) as compared to post emergence treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 420–590 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Post-emergence imazethapyr restricted chickpea growth for 10-15 days relative to pre-emergence treatments.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
post emergence application of imazethapyr @ 25 g a.i. ha-1e0
Outcome
crop growthe0
Direction
restricte0
Value
10-15 dayse0
Comparator
pre-emergence treatmentse0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“post emergence application of imazethapyr @ 25 g a.i. ha-1 was found to restrict crop growth for a period of 10-15 days as compared to pre-emergence treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 692–851 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

90% crop residue retention increased plant height relative to no retention.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
90% crop residue retentione0
Outcome
plant heighte0
Direction
highere0
Value
54.81cme0
Comparator
no crop residue retentione0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher residue retention level treatment (90% crop residue retention) recorded significantly higher plant height (54.81cm), dry matter plant-1 (18.39 g plant-1), number of pods plant-1 (36.46), seeds plant-1 (47.11), seed yield (1202 kg ha-1) and straw yield (2916 kg ha-1) as compared to no crop residue retention”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

90% crop residue retention increased dry matter plant-1 relative to no retention.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
90% crop residue retentione0
Outcome
dry matter plant-1e0
Direction
highere0
Value
18.39 g plant-1e0
Comparator
no crop residue retentione0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher residue retention level treatment (90% crop residue retention) recorded significantly higher plant height (54.81cm), dry matter plant-1 (18.39 g plant-1), number of pods plant-1 (36.46), seeds plant-1 (47.11), seed yield (1202 kg ha-1) and straw yield (2916 kg ha-1) as compared to no crop residue retention”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

90% crop residue retention increased number of pods plant-1 relative to no retention.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
90% crop residue retentione0
Outcome
number of pods plant-1e0
Direction
highere0
Value
36.46e0
Comparator
no crop residue retentione0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher residue retention level treatment (90% crop residue retention) recorded significantly higher plant height (54.81cm), dry matter plant-1 (18.39 g plant-1), number of pods plant-1 (36.46), seeds plant-1 (47.11), seed yield (1202 kg ha-1) and straw yield (2916 kg ha-1) as compared to no crop residue retention”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

90% crop residue retention increased seeds plant-1 relative to no retention.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
90% crop residue retentione0
Outcome
seeds plant-1e0
Direction
highere0
Value
47.11e0
Comparator
no crop residue retentione0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher residue retention level treatment (90% crop residue retention) recorded significantly higher plant height (54.81cm), dry matter plant-1 (18.39 g plant-1), number of pods plant-1 (36.46), seeds plant-1 (47.11), seed yield (1202 kg ha-1) and straw yield (2916 kg ha-1) as compared to no crop residue retention”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

90% crop residue retention increased seed yield relative to no retention.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
90% crop residue retentione0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
1202 kg ha-1e0
Comparator
no crop residue retentione0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher residue retention level treatment (90% crop residue retention) recorded significantly higher plant height (54.81cm), dry matter plant-1 (18.39 g plant-1), number of pods plant-1 (36.46), seeds plant-1 (47.11), seed yield (1202 kg ha-1) and straw yield (2916 kg ha-1) as compared to no crop residue retention”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

90% crop residue retention increased straw yield relative to no retention.

Taxon
chickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
90% crop residue retentione0
Outcome
straw yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
2916 kg ha-1e0
Comparator
no crop residue retentione0

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

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher residue retention level treatment (90% crop residue retention) recorded significantly higher plant height (54.81cm), dry matter plant-1 (18.39 g plant-1), number of pods plant-1 (36.46), seeds plant-1 (47.11), seed yield (1202 kg ha-1) and straw yield (2916 kg ha-1) as compared to no crop residue retention”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 915–1229 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 43–72 · show in text ↑

Imazethapyr · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

10 papers: 6 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

organic · growth · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

herbicide · weed · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

75 papers: 74 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. positive

71 papers more in this group

See all 75 papers →

organic · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

24 papers: 24 positive, 0 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 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.