Abstract
A study was conducted during 2016–17 to 2018–19 at farmer’s field under Farmer FIRST Project (FFP), at College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Waraseoni, Balaghat, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, to assess the impact of integrated nutrient management on crop productivity, soil-nutrient balance and economics of rice (Oryza sativa L.)–chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cropping system. Application of 75% NPK + 5 t/ha farmyard manure (FYM) + biofertilizers [blue green algae (BGA)/Rhizobium and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB)] resulted in significantly higher grain yield of rice and chickpea (4,429 kg/ha and 1,538 kg/ha, respectively) over the Farmer Practice (3,644 kg/ha and 1,036 kg/ha respectively). The maximum nutrients uptake (N, P and K) by rice and chickpea crops were recorded in the treatment receiving 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizers. The conjunctive use of inorganic fertilizers along with organic manure and biofertilizers exhibited the highest availability of soil N, P, K and Zn at post-harvest of chickpea crop as compared to the other treatment combinations. Further, results showed that the highest cost of cultivation (`58,200/ha) and net returns (`96,832/ha) were obtained in 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizers treatment. The benefit: cost (B: C) ratio computed for rice–chickpea cropping system indicated that, the higher B: C ratio was found to be associated with higher production and better quality of the produce.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Integrated nutrients increased rice grain yield to 4,429 kg/ha versus 3,644 kg/ha under farmer practice.
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativae0 - Treatment
- 75% NPK + 5 t/ha farmyard manure (FYM) + biofertilizerse0
- Outcome
- grain yield of ricee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 4,429 kg/hae0
- Qualifier
- 3,644 kg/hae0
- Comparator
- Farmer Practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 75% NPK + 5 t/ha farmyard manure (FYM) + biofertilizers [blue green algae (BGA)/Rhizobium and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB)] resulted in significantly higher grain yield of rice and chickpea (4,429 kg/ha and 1,538 kg/ha, respectively) over the Farmer Practice (3,644 kg/ha and 1,036 kg/ha respectively).”
Claim · model-written summary
Integrated nutrients increased chickpea grain yield to 1,538 kg/ha versus 1,036 kg/ha under farmer practice.
- Taxon
- chickpea
Cicer arietinume0 - Treatment
- 75% NPK + 5 t/ha farmyard manure (FYM) + biofertilizerse0
- Outcome
- grain yield of rice and chickpeae0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 1,538 kg/hae0
- Qualifier
- 1,036 kg/hae0
- Comparator
- Farmer Practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of 75% NPK + 5 t/ha farmyard manure (FYM) + biofertilizers [blue green algae (BGA)/Rhizobium and phosphate-solubilizing bacteria (PSB)] resulted in significantly higher grain yield of rice and chickpea (4,429 kg/ha and 1,538 kg/ha, respectively) over the Farmer Practice (3,644 kg/ha and 1,036 kg/ha respectively).”
Claim · model-written summary
Integrated nutrients produced maximum N, P and K uptake by rice and chickpea.
- Taxon
- rice and chickpeaCicer arietinumOryza sativae0
- Treatment
- 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizerse0
- Outcome
- nutrients uptake (N, P and K)e0
- Direction
- maximume0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The maximum nutrients uptake (N, P and K) by rice and chickpea crops were recorded in the treatment receiving 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizers.”
Claim · model-written summary
Conjunctive fertilizers, manure and biofertilizers gave the highest postharvest soil N, P, K and Zn availability.
- Taxon
- chickpeaCicer arietinume0
- Treatment
- inorganic fertilizers along with organic manure and biofertilizerse0
- Outcome
- availability of soil N, P, K and Zne0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- the other treatment combinationse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The conjunctive use of inorganic fertilizers along with organic manure and biofertilizers exhibited the highest availability of soil N, P, K and Zn at post-harvest of chickpea crop as compared to the other treatment combinations.”
Claim · model-written summary
The integrated nutrient treatment had the highest cultivation cost of `58,200/ha.
- Treatment
- 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizerse0
- Outcome
- cost of cultivatione0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- `58,200/hae0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“the highest cost of cultivation (`58,200/ha) and net returns (`96,832/ha) were obtained in 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizers treatment.”
Claim · model-written summary
The integrated nutrient treatment had the highest net returns of `96,832/ha.
- Treatment
- 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizerse0
- Outcome
- net returnse0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- `96,832/hae0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“the highest cost of cultivation (`58,200/ha) and net returns (`96,832/ha) were obtained in 75% NPK + 5 t/ha FYM + biofertilizers treatment.”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher benefit to cost ratio was associated with greater production and better produce quality.
Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparatorSetting
Verbatim
e0“the higher B: C ratio was found to be associated with higher production and better quality of the produce.”
The same questions in other papers
inoculation · nutrient: content · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
56 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 papers →fertilization · nutrient: content · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
79 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
77 papers more in this group
See all 81 papers →inoculation · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
159 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
163 papers more in this group
See all 167 papers →inoculation · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
199 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
213 papers more in this group
See all 217 papers →fertilization · yield · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results
325 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
341 papers more in this group
See all 345 papers →inoculation · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
381 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
414 papers more in this group
See all 418 papers →fertilization · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
931 papers in the same direction as this paper · 56 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
989 papers more in this group
See all 993 papers →fertilization · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
3,182 papers in the same direction as this paper · 207 in the opposite direction · 65 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
3,451 papers more in this group
See all 3,455 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.