Paper · 2024 · International Journal of Environment and Climate Change

Effect of Irrigation Scheduling and Different Sowing Dates on Growth and Yield of Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

Pravesh Kumar; Vineet Dheer; Pradeep Kumar; et al.

11
claims
20
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The study was conducted at Acharya Narendra Deva University of Agriculture and Technology, Ayodhya (U.P.) Agronomy Research Farm in rabi season 2021-22. Twelve main plot treatments included 15th November, 25th November, and 5th December sowing dates, while four sub plot treatments included irrigation at 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, and 1.2 IW/CPE ratios. Split plot design was used for three replications. Under 15th November sowing, all growth, yield, and characteristics rose dramatically. Irrigating at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio increased wheat shoot m-2, plant height (cm), dry matter accumulation (g m-2), yield characteristics, grain and straw yield (q ha-1) considerably. Wheat yields were highest when sown on November 15. Under 15th November planting, water use efficiency was highest (9.85 kg ha-1mm-1). Out of all treatments, 15th Nov planting had the highest biological (128.21 q ha-1) and seed yield (51.43 q ha-1) and irrigation on 1.0 IW/CPE had the highest biological (127.18 q ha-1) and seed yield (50.83 Maximum Harvest Index was 40.11 percent with 15th November planting and 1.0 IW/CPE ratio irrigation (39.96%).

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

November 15 sowing increased growth and yield characteristics.

Treatment
15th November sowinge0
Outcome
growth, yield, and characteristicse0
Direction
rosee0

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

“Under 15th November sowing, all growth, yield, and characteristics rose dramatically”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 394–478 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE increased shoots, height and dry matter.

Treatment
1.0 IW/CPE ratioe0
Outcome
shoot m-2, plant height (cm), dry matter accumulation (g m-2)e0
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

“Irrigating at 1.0 IW/CPE ratio increased wheat shoot m-2, plant height (cm), dry matter accumulation (g m-2)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 480–588 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE increased yield characteristics and grain and straw yield.

Treatment
Irrigation Schedulingt0
Outcome
grain and straw yielde0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“yield characteristics, grain and straw yield (q ha-1) considerably”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 590–656 · show in text ↑
t0

“Irrigation Scheduling and Different Sowing Dates on Growth and Yield of Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 10–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

November 15 sowing maximized wheat yield.

Treatment
November 15e0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
higheste0

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

“Wheat yields were highest when sown on November 15”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 658–708 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

November 15 planting maximized water use efficiency at 9.85 kg ha-1mm-1.

Treatment
15th November plantinge0
Outcome
water use efficiencye0
Direction
higheste0
Value
9.85 kg ha-1mm-1e0

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

“Under 15th November planting, water use efficiency was highest (9.85 kg ha-1mm-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 710–791 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

November 15 planting yielded 128.21 q ha-1 biological yield.

Treatment
15th Nov plantinge0
Outcome
biologicale0
Direction
higheste0
Value
128.21 q ha-1e0

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

“15th Nov planting had the highest biological (128.21 q ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 816–876 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

November 15 planting yielded 51.43 q ha-1 seed yield.

Treatment
Different Sowing Datest0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Value
51.43 q ha-1e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“seed yield (51.43 q ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 881–906 · show in text ↑
t0

“Different Sowing Dates on Growth and Yield of Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 36–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE produced 127.18 q ha-1 biological yield.

Treatment
irrigation on 1.0 IW/CPEe0
Outcome
biologicale0
Direction
higheste0
Value
127.18 q ha-1e0

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

“irrigation on 1.0 IW/CPE had the highest biological (127.18 q ha-1)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 911–978 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE produced 50.83 seed yield, with unit truncated.

Treatment
Irrigation Schedulingt0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Value
50.83e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“seed yield (50.83”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 983–1000 · show in text ↑
t0

“Irrigation Scheduling and Different Sowing Dates on Growth and Yield of Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 10–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

November 15 planting gave 40.11 percent maximum harvest index.

Treatment
15th November plantinge0
Outcome
Harvest Indexe0
Direction
Maximume0
Value
40.11 percente0

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

“Maximum Harvest Index was 40.11 percent with 15th November planting”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1001–1068 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 82–87 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at 1.0 IW/CPE gave 39.96% harvest index.

Treatment
1.0 IW/CPE ratio irrigatione0
Outcome
Yieldt0
Value
39.96%e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

“1.0 IW/CPE ratio irrigation (39.96%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1073–1109 · show in text ↑
t0

“Yield of Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–87 · show in text ↑

sowing time · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

462 papers: 266 positive, 196 negative or no effect

265 papers in the same direction as this paper · 191 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

458 papers more in this group

See all 462 papers →

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. positive
  2. positive
  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.