Paper · 1989 · Madras Agricultural Journal

PERFORMANCE OF WHEAT VARIETY UNDER LIMITED MOISTURE SUPPLY CONDITIONS IN HEAVY SOILS

SHAKTAWAT M.S; Jaipur (RAJ) India; JOSHI N.L

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Performance of wheat varieties under limited moisture supply conditions on heavy soils showed that tuo irrigations increased grain production over no post-souing irrigation and one irrigation by 46 and 23 per cent respectively. Straw yield increased due to tuo irri- gations at CRI and flag leaf stage by 56 and 14 per cent over no post- souing irrigation and irrigation at CRI stage respectively. The variety HI-601 gave maximum grain yield followed by 3-40, Kalyan Sona and Sonalika.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two irrigations increased grain production by 46 per cent over no post-sowing irrigation.

Treatment
tuo irrigationse0
Outcome
grain productione0
Direction
increasede0
Value
46e0
Comparator
no post-souing irrigatione0

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

“tuo irrigations increased grain production over no post-souing irrigation and one irrigation by 46 and 23 per cent respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 99–226 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 15–20 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two irrigations increased grain production by 23 per cent over one irrigation.

Treatment
tuo irrigationse0
Outcome
grain productione0
Direction
increasede0
Value
23 per cente0
Comparator
one irrigatione0

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

“tuo irrigations increased grain production over no post-souing irrigation and one irrigation by 46 and 23 per cent respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 99–226 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 15–20 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two irrigations increased straw yield by 56 per cent over no post-sowing irrigation.

Treatment
tuo irri- gations at CRI and flag leaf stagee0
Outcome
Straw yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
56e0
Comparator
no post- souing irrigatione0

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

“Straw yield increased due to tuo irri- gations at CRI and flag leaf stage by 56 and 14 per cent over no post- souing irrigation and irrigation at CRI stage respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 228–396 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 15–20 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two irrigations increased straw yield by 14 per cent over CRI-stage irrigation.

Treatment
tuo irri- gations at CRI and flag leaf stagee0
Outcome
Straw yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
14 per cente0
Comparator
irrigation at CRI stagee0

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

“Straw yield increased due to tuo irri- gations at CRI and flag leaf stage by 56 and 14 per cent over no post- souing irrigation and irrigation at CRI stage respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 228–396 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 15–20 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

HI-601 gave maximum grain yield, followed by three other varieties.

Material
HI-601e0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
maximume0
Comparator
3-40, Kalyan Sona and Sonalikae0

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 variety HI-601 gave maximum grain yield followed by 3-40, Kalyan Sona and Sonalika”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 398–484 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 15–20 · show in text ↑

irrigation · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

989 papers: 798 positive, 191 negative or no effect

797 papers in the same direction as this paper · 184 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

985 papers more in this group

See all 989 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.