Abstract
To quantify the efficacy of effective weed control methods and spacing of groundnut on soil microbiological properties, a field experiment was conducted between 2009 and 2010 at the Teaching and Research Farm of the University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, a sub-humid region of southwestern Nigeria. Treatments were five levels of weed control (codal gold 1.6 kg a.i/ha, codal gold 1.6 kg a.i/ha + hoe weeding, codal gold 2.4 kg a.i/ha, hoe weeding and a control (weedy check); two levels of spacing (15 cm and 25 cm) and eight levels of weeding intervals on soil microbial biomass, nodulation, the biomass of root and shoot as well as yield of groundnut in a split-plot design fitted into a randomized complete block design. The results indicated that both levels of spacing have no significant effect on the soil microbiological parameters, groundnut biomass production, nodulation and yield. So, the levels of weed control have no significant effect on groundnut biomass production and nodulation but showed a significant effect on microbial biomass carbon (MBC), microbial biomass nitrogen (MBN), total fungal count, pod count and pod weight of groundnut with plots kept weedy throughout the experiment at 25 cm intra row spacing having 34 % MBC more than plots kept weed free throughout the experiment at the same spacing.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Spacing had no significant effect on soil microbiological parameters.
- Taxon
- spacinge0
- Treatment
- both levels of spacinge0
- Outcome
- soil microbiological parameterse0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“both levels of spacing have no significant effect on the soil microbiological parameters”
Claim · model-written summary
Spacing had no significant effect on groundnut biomass, nodulation, or yield.
- Taxon
- groundnut
Arachis hypogaeae0 - Treatment
- both levels of spacinge0
- Outcome
- groundnut biomass production, nodulation and yielde0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both levels of spacing have no significant effect on the soil microbiological parameters, groundnut biomass production, nodulation and yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control level had no significant effect on groundnut biomass or nodulation.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- levels of weed controle0
- Outcome
- groundnut biomass production and nodulatione0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“levels of weed control have no significant effect on groundnut biomass production and nodulation”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control significantly affected soil microbial biomass carbon and nitrogen.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- levels of weed controle0
- Outcome
- microbial biomass carbon (MBC), microbial biomass nitrogen (MBN)e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“levels of weed control have no significant effect on groundnut biomass production and nodulation but showed a significant effect on microbial biomass carbon (MBC), microbial biomass nitrogen (MBN)”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control significantly affected total fungal count and groundnut pod count and weight.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae0
- Treatment
- weed controle1
- Outcome
- total fungal count, pod count and pod weight of groundnute0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“showed a significant effect on microbial biomass carbon (MBC), microbial biomass nitrogen (MBN), total fungal count, pod count and pod weight of groundnut”
e1“levels of weed control have no significant effect on groundnut biomass production and nodulation”
Claim · model-written summary
Weedy plots at 25 cm spacing had 34% more microbial biomass carbon than weed-free plots.
- Taxon
- groundnutArachis hypogaeae1
- Treatment
- plots kept weedy throughout the experimente0
- Outcome
- MBCe0
- Direction
- moree0
- Value
- 34 %e0
- Qualifier
- 25 cm intra row spacinge0
- Comparator
- plots kept weed free throughout the experimente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plots kept weedy throughout the experiment at 25 cm intra row spacing having 34 % MBC more than plots kept weed free throughout the experiment at the same spacing”
e1“both levels of spacing have no significant effect on the soil microbiological parameters, groundnut biomass production, nodulation and yield”
The same questions in other papers
density · symbiosis · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
herbicide · symbiosis · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.