Assessment of the Economics with and yield by Integrated Nutrient Management on Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

Abstract

An experiment was conducted during the Rabi season of 2017-18 at the student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur. The experiment consisted of integrated nutrient management in a randomized block design with three replications. The soil of field analyzed N, P, K, Zn, and S was medium-fertility status in respect of available NPK and S, but Zn status of micronutrient. The treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment found superior in terms of maximum root and shoot growth, yield attributes and yield the maximum grain yield (58.75 q ha-1), straw yield (79.31 qha-1), Gross income (141586 Rs. ha-1) and Net Income (93036 Rs. ha-1) under-recorded in (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment the increment in Grain yield, Gross income and net income evaluated 12.76%, 11.34% and 11.19%, respectively under (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment compared to control treatment.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) increased grain yield by 12.76% over the control treatment in wheat.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte0
Outcome: Grain yielde0
Direction: incremente0
Value: 12.76%e0
Comparator: control treatmente0
Setting: Kanpure1

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

*Triticum aestivum* · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“the increment in Grain yield, Gross income and net income evaluated 12.76%, 11.34% and 11.19%, respectively under (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment compared to control treatment”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 789–992 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) increased gross income by 11.34% over the control treatment in wheat.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte0
Outcome: Gross incomee0
Direction: incremente0
Value: 11.34%e0
Comparator: control treatmente0
Setting: Kanpure1

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

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“the increment in Grain yield, Gross income and net income evaluated 12.76%, 11.34% and 11.19%, respectively under (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment compared to control treatment”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 789–992 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) increased net income by 11.19% over the control treatment in wheat.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte0
Outcome: net incomee0
Direction: incremente0
Value: 11.19%e0
Comparator: control treatmente0
Setting: Kanpure1

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

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“the increment in Grain yield, Gross income and net income evaluated 12.76%, 11.34% and 11.19%, respectively under (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment compared to control treatment”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 789–992 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under the integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) the maximum grain yield recorded in wheat was 58.75 q ha-1.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte2
Outcome: grain yielde0
Direction: maximume0
Value: 58.75 q ha-1e0
Setting: Kanpure1

Not reportedComparator

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

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“the maximum grain yield (58.75 q ha-1), straw yield (79.31 qha-1), Gross income (141586 Rs. ha-1) and Net Income (93036 Rs. ha-1)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 581–710 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

e2
“The treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment found superior”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 422–510 · show in text ↑

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under the integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) the maximum straw yield recorded in wheat was 79.31 qha-1.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte2
Outcome: straw yielde0
Direction: maximume0
Value: 79.31 qha-1e0
Setting: Kanpure1

Not reportedComparator

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

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“the maximum grain yield (58.75 q ha-1), straw yield (79.31 qha-1), Gross income (141586 Rs. ha-1) and Net Income (93036 Rs. ha-1)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 581–710 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

e2
“The treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment found superior”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 422–510 · show in text ↑

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under the integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) the maximum gross income recorded in wheat was 141586 Rs. ha-1.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte2
Outcome: Gross incomee0
Direction: maximume0
Value: 141586 Rs. ha-1e0
Setting: Kanpure1

Not reportedComparator

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

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“the maximum grain yield (58.75 q ha-1), straw yield (79.31 qha-1), Gross income (141586 Rs. ha-1) and Net Income (93036 Rs. ha-1)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 581–710 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

e2
“The treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment found superior”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 422–510 · show in text ↑

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Under the integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) the maximum net income recorded in wheat was 93036 Rs. ha-1.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte2
Outcome: Net Incomee0
Direction: maximume0
Value: 93036 Rs. ha-1e0
Setting: Kanpure1

Not reportedComparator

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

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“the maximum grain yield (58.75 q ha-1), straw yield (79.31 qha-1), Gross income (141586 Rs. ha-1) and Net Income (93036 Rs. ha-1)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 581–710 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

e2
“The treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment found superior”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 422–510 · show in text ↑

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The integrated treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) was superior for maximum root and shoot growth in wheat.

Taxon: Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment: NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicomposte0
Outcome: root and shoot growthe0
Direction: maximume0
Setting: Kanpure1

Not reportedComparator

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

Verbatim

t0
“Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–108 · show in text ↑

e0
“The treatment (NPK + S + Zn + Azotobacter + PSB + vermicompost) treatment found superior in terms of maximum root and shoot growth”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 422–552 · show in text ↑

e1
“student instructional farm of Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur”
✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 69–166 · show in text ↑

Azotobacter · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

88 papers: 87 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

84 papers more in this group

See all 88 papers →

zinc atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

200 papers: 155 positive, 45 negative or no effect

154 papers in the same direction as this paper · 43 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

no effect
Surfactant with chelated zinc sprays did not cause negative wheat growth effects.
Zinc Mobility in Wheat: Uptake and Distribution of Zinc Applied to Leaves or Roots · 2001
Opposite direction
no effect
Wheat plants with low Mn or low Zn supply showed no growth differences from controls at the three harvests.
Distribution and remobilization of Zn and Mn during grain development in wheat · 1994 · compared with controls (sufficient Zn and Mn)
Opposite directionAbout lacking this nutrient, so it counts the other way round
negative
The 300 Zn treatment decreased shoot and root growth.
Analysis of Triticum aestivum seedling response to the excess of zinc · 2015
Opposite direction

196 papers more in this group

See all 200 papers →

zinc atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

511 papers: 456 positive, 55 negative or no effect

455 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

no effect
Zinc application yielded hardly any benefit.
Landscape positions dictating crop fertilizer responses in wheat-based farming systems of East African Highlands · 2020
Opposite direction
negative
Zinc inhibited non mycorrhizal wheat root dry yield.
Arbuscular mycorrhizal strategy for zinc mycoremediation and diminished translocation to shoots and grains in wheat · 2017
Opposite direction
no effect
Foliar Zn had no significant effect on wheat grain yield.
Foliar zinc fertilization improves the zinc nutritional value of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) grain · 2011
Opposite direction

507 papers more in this group

See all 511 papers →

Azotobacter · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

29 papers: 29 positive, 0 negative or no effect

28 papers in the same direction as this paper

positive
Azotobacter seed inoculation increased wheat root hairs.
Genotypic Characterization of Azotobacteria Isolated from Argentinean Soils and Plant‐Growth‐Promoting Traits of Selected Strains with Prospects for Biofertilizer Production · 2013
Same direction
positive
Azotobacter strain (Azo-8) with urea and farmyard manure increased shoot fresh weight of dryland wheat by more than 23% over control.
Effectiveness of Azotobacter bio-inoculant for wheat grown under dryland condition. · 2013 · compared with control
Same direction
positive
Combined Azotobacter and 10 G 3 M L-TRP application significantly increased plant height by 5.8%.
Azotobacter and L-tryptophan Application for Improving Wheat Yield · 1999 · compared with untreated control
Same direction

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

fertilization · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

755 papers: 663 positive, 92 negative or no effect

662 papers in the same direction as this paper · 89 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

no effect
Reducing fertilizer by 25% did not reduce soil nutrient availability or wheat nutrient content, height and dry weight.
Beneficial bacteria activate nutrients and promote wheat growth under conditions of reduced fertilizer application · 2020
Opposite direction
negative
Gibberellic acid reduced root dry weight of wheat, unless applied to the shoots in a lanolin paste.
The plant‐growth‐promoting properties of gibberellic acid, a metabolic product of the fungus gibberella fujikuroi · 1954
Opposite direction
no effect
fertilizer N rate had no effect on main stem development rate.
Estimation of Spring Wheat Leaf Growth Rates and Anthesis from Air Temperature¹ · 1984
Opposite direction

751 papers more in this group

See all 755 papers →

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

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

no effect
Current high nitrogen practices do not significantly raise crop yields relative to optimum fertilization.
Reducing environmental risk by improving N management in intensive Chinese agricultural systems · 2009 · compared with knowledge-based optimum N fertilization
Opposite direction
negative
Wheat yield declined by 0.04 Mg ha −1 yr −1 with 75 and 100% N-P-K fertilizer.
Yield and Soil Nutrient Changes in a Long‐Term Rice‐Wheat Rotation in India · 2002
Opposite direction
negative
The authors concluded that N fertiliser could not compensate for the yield reduction in canola and wheat due to late sowing.
Effects of sowing time and nitrogen fertiliser on canola and wheat, and nitrogen fertiliser on Indian mustard. I. Dry matter production, grain yield, and yield components · 2001
Opposite direction

3,434 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 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.

Abstract

Claims 8

The same questions in other papers

Azotobacter · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

zinc atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

zinc atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

Azotobacter · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

fertilization · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

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