Paper · 2023 · International Journal of Environment and Climate Change

Integrated Nutrient Management in Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.) for Enhancing Soil Health

Prasendip Sarkar; Arun Alfred David; Tarence Thomas; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
1
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Integrated nutrient management (INM) is a holistic approach that involves the application of organic and inorganic fertilizers to improve soil health and crop productivity. The research study was conducted to demonstrate the effective use of INM on soil health in Green gram. We used a randomized block design (RBD) with four levels of poultry manure @ 0, 50, 75 and 100% ha-1, four levels of nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium@ 0, 50, 75 and 100% ha-1 and rhizobium seed treatment. The revealed that treatment T9 (N20P40K40 kg ha-1 + PM @ 5 t ha-1 and Rhi @ 200g 10 kg-1 Seed) resulted in a slight change in soil pH 6.82, electrical conductivity (EC) 0.198 dS m-1. In post-harvest soil of fertilizers observations showed significant increase in pore space 49.20 %, water holding capacity 47.59 %, organic carbon 0.49 %, and available N 334.23 kg ha-1, P 34.58 kg ha-1, K 202.83 kg ha-1. The increase in NPK was found to be significant (P<0.05) among other treatments in Green gram cultivation and soil quality improvement. The application of N P K with poultry manure was a magnificent source of fertilization.

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

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T9 yielded a soil pH of 6.82.

Treatment
T9 (N20P40K40 kg ha-1 + PM @ 5 t ha-1 and Rhi @ 200g 10 kg-1 Seed)e0
Outcome
soil pHe0
Direction
slight changee0
Value
6.82e0

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“treatment T9 (N20P40K40 kg ha-1 + PM @ 5 t ha-1 and Rhi @ 200g 10 kg-1 Seed) resulted in a slight change in soil pH 6.82, electrical conductivity (EC) 0.198 dS m-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 502–665 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T9 yielded electrical conductivity of 0.198 dS m-1.

Treatment
T9 (N20P40K40 kg ha-1 + PM @ 5 t ha-1 and Rhi @ 200g 10 kg-1 Seed)e0
Outcome
electrical conductivity (EC)e0
Direction
slight changee0
Value
0.198 dS m-1e0

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“treatment T9 (N20P40K40 kg ha-1 + PM @ 5 t ha-1 and Rhi @ 200g 10 kg-1 Seed) resulted in a slight change in soil pH 6.82, electrical conductivity (EC) 0.198 dS m-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 502–665 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization significantly increased postharvest soil pore space to 49.20 %.

Treatment
fertilizerse0
Outcome
pore spacee0
Direction
increasee0
Value
49.20 %e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“In post-harvest soil of fertilizers observations showed significant increase in pore space 49.20 %, water holding capacity 47.59 %, organic carbon 0.49 %, and available N 334.23 kg ha-1, P 34.58 kg ha-1, K 202.83 kg ha-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–887 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization significantly increased soil water holding capacity to 47.59 %.

Treatment
fertilizerse0
Outcome
water holding capacitye0
Direction
increasee0
Value
47.59 %e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“In post-harvest soil of fertilizers observations showed significant increase in pore space 49.20 %, water holding capacity 47.59 %, organic carbon 0.49 %, and available N 334.23 kg ha-1, P 34.58 kg ha-1, K 202.83 kg ha-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–887 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization significantly increased soil organic carbon to 0.49 %.

Treatment
fertilizerse0
Outcome
organic carbone0
Direction
increasee0
Value
0.49 %e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“In post-harvest soil of fertilizers observations showed significant increase in pore space 49.20 %, water holding capacity 47.59 %, organic carbon 0.49 %, and available N 334.23 kg ha-1, P 34.58 kg ha-1, K 202.83 kg ha-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–887 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization significantly increased available soil N to 334.23 kg ha-1.

Treatment
fertilizerse0
Outcome
available Ne0
Direction
increasee0
Value
334.23 kg ha-1e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“In post-harvest soil of fertilizers observations showed significant increase in pore space 49.20 %, water holding capacity 47.59 %, organic carbon 0.49 %, and available N 334.23 kg ha-1, P 34.58 kg ha-1, K 202.83 kg ha-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–887 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization significantly increased available soil P to 34.58 kg ha-1.

Treatment
fertilizerse0
Outcome
Pe0
Direction
increasee0
Value
34.58 kg ha-1e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“In post-harvest soil of fertilizers observations showed significant increase in pore space 49.20 %, water holding capacity 47.59 %, organic carbon 0.49 %, and available N 334.23 kg ha-1, P 34.58 kg ha-1, K 202.83 kg ha-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–887 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization significantly increased available soil K to 202.83 kg ha-1.

Treatment
fertilizerse0
Outcome
Ke0
Direction
increasee0
Value
202.83 kg ha-1e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Green Gram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 34–63 · show in text ↑
e0

“In post-harvest soil of fertilizers observations showed significant increase in pore space 49.20 %, water holding capacity 47.59 %, organic carbon 0.49 %, and available N 334.23 kg ha-1, P 34.58 kg ha-1, K 202.83 kg ha-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–887 · show in text ↑

fertilization · soil: physics · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 4 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

fertilization · soil: chemistry · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 17 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: content · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

79 papers: 76 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

75 papers more in this group

See all 79 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.