Paper · 2025 · International Journal of Plant & Soil Science

Influence of Humic Acid on Yield and Physiological Attributes of Greengram (Vigna radiata L.)

Sooryasree P; J. K. Patel; Ankitkumar Chauhan; et al.

4
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted to study the influence of humic acid on physiological attributes of greengram (Vigna radiata L.) in loamy sand at Agronomy Instructional Farm, Chimanbhai Patel College of Agriculture, Sardarkrushinagar Dantiwada Agricultural University, Gujarat during kharif of 2023. Nine treatment combinations comprising three levels each of soil application of humic acid (0, 3 and 6 kg/ha) and foliar application of humic acid (0, 250 and 500 ppm) were evaluated in randomized block design with factorial concept and replicated four times. Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS) besides recommended dose of fertilizer viz., 20:40:00 N: P2O5: K2O kg ha-1 led to notably higher protein content in seeds, increased protein yield, and enhanced nitrogen and phosphorus content, and uptake in both seeds and stover. This treatment also improved grain and straw yields. The lowest protein content, protein yield, nutrient content and uptake in seed and stover at harvest, as well as grain and straw yields, were observed in plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acid.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil application of 6 kg humic acid per ha plus foliar 250 ppm, with the recommended fertilizer dose, gave notably higher seed protein content in greengram than plots without humic acid.

Treatment
Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)e1
Outcome
protein content in seedse2
Direction
highere2
Comparator
plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acide3

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–705 · show in text ↑
e2

“led to notably higher protein content in seeds”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 781–827 · show in text ↑
e3

“plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1144–1211 · show in text ↑
t0

“Greengram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same humic acid treatment increased protein yield of greengram.

Treatment
Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)e1
Outcome
protein yielde2
Direction
increasede2
Comparator
plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acide3

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–705 · show in text ↑
e2

“increased protein yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 829–852 · show in text ↑
e3

“plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1144–1211 · show in text ↑
t0

“Greengram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same humic acid treatment enhanced nitrogen and phosphorus content and uptake in greengram seeds and stover.

Treatment
Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)e1
Outcome
nitrogen and phosphorus content, and uptakee2
Direction
enhancede2
Comparator
plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acide3

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–705 · show in text ↑
e2

“enhanced nitrogen and phosphorus content, and uptake in both seeds and stover”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 858–935 · show in text ↑
e3

“plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1144–1211 · show in text ↑
t0

“Greengram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–93 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The same humic acid treatment improved greengram grain and straw yields.

Treatment
Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)e1
Outcome
grain and straw yieldse2
Direction
improvede2
Comparator
plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acide3

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

Vigna radiata var. radiata
Vigna radiata var. radiata · Taxon · picture of the speciesIvar Leidus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“Soil application of 6 kg humic acid ha-1 at the time of sowing and foliar application of 250 ppm humic acid at 30 and 45 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 561–705 · show in text ↑
e2

“This treatment also improved grain and straw yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 937–988 · show in text ↑
e3

“plots that did not receive soil or foliar application of humic acid”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1144–1211 · show in text ↑
t0

“Greengram (Vigna radiata L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 65–93 · show in text ↑

other · quality: protein · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

9 papers: 8 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive
    Seaweed extract seed soaking plus foliar sprays gave the highest grain protein content in greengram (24.67%).

    Evaluation of seaweed extract on growth determinants, yield and biochemical parameters of greengram (Vigna radiata) · 2019 · compared with seed soaking in 0.1 % seaweed extract solution for 30 minutes + foliar application of seaweed extract (0.25%) on 25 DAS (single spray)

    Same direction

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

sowing time · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

26 papers: 21 positive, 5 negative or no effect

20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 papers →

other · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

29 papers: 28 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

application · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results

216 papers: 209 positive, 7 negative or no effect

208 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

212 papers more in this group

See all 216 papers →

sowing time · nutrient: content · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

other · nutrient: content · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

application · nutrient: content · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

29 papers: 29 positive, 0 negative or no effect

28 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

application · quality: protein · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree

30 papers: 30 positive, 0 negative or no effect

29 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 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.