Paper · 2025 · International Journal of Research in Agronomy

Quality and economics of onion (Allium cepa L.), as affected by fertility levels and jeevamrut application

SK Acharya; GS Patel; Mukesh Kumar

6
claims
11
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The experiment was carried out during rabi season of 2022-23and2023-24 at college Farm, COH, SDAU, Jagudan. The treatments comprised of three fertility levels and seven levels of jeevamrut application having total 21 number of treatment combinations. Standard POP was followed during entire period of investigation. The experiment was laid out in FRBD and replicated thrice. Observations quality as well as post-harvest observations were recorded. The results showed that among fertility levels, the significantly minimum PLW at 1st month and PLW at 2nd month on pooled basis were observed in F2 (80% RDF) which was very close with F1 i.e. 100 per cent RDF. Neck thickness (cm) after curing, sulphur content (%) and TSS (ºbrix) were non-significant though the numerically maximum value was recorded in J6 (basal application of ghanjeevamrut 750 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @5%). Minimum PLW at 1st month on pooled basis were recorded in J7 (drenching of jeevamrut @ 10% + spray of jeevamrut @ 5%). Interaction effect between fertility levels and jeevamrut application, the minimum PLW at 1st month was reported in F2J6 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @750 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @5%) and F1J5 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @500 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @ 5%). It can be concluded that the application of 80 per cent RDF (80-40-40 kg NPK/ha) through chemical fertilizers with basal application of jeevamrut @ 750 kg/ha and spray of jeevamrut @ 5 per cent at fortnightly interval up to 4 months, in addition of 20 tonne FYM and 20 kg S/ha for getting good quality, shelf life and economics for higher return of rabi onion.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

F2 80% RDF minimized physiological weight loss at months one and two.

Taxon
onionAllium cepat0
Treatment
F2 (80% RDF)e0
Outcome
PLW at 1st month and PLW at 2nd monthe0
Direction
minimume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“significantly minimum PLW at 1st month and PLW at 2nd month on pooled basis were observed in F2 (80% RDF)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 500–605 · show in text ↑
t0

“onion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–30 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivenot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

J6 had numerically maximal neck thickness, sulfur content and TSS, without significance.

Taxon
onionAllium cepat0
Treatment
J6 (basal application of ghanjeevamrut 750 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @5%)e0
Outcome
Neck thickness (cm) after curing, sulphur content (%) and TSS (ºbrix)e0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Neck thickness (cm) after curing, sulphur content (%) and TSS (ºbrix) were non-significant though the numerically maximum value was recorded in J6 (basal application of ghanjeevamrut 750 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 658–876 · show in text ↑
t0

“onion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–30 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

J7 minimized first-month physiological weight loss.

Taxon
onionAllium cepat0
Treatment
J7 (drenching of jeevamrut @ 10% + spray of jeevamrut @ 5%)e0
Outcome
PLW at 1st monthe0
Direction
Minimume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Minimum PLW at 1st month on pooled basis were recorded in J7 (drenching of jeevamrut @ 10% + spray of jeevamrut @ 5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 878–995 · show in text ↑
t0

“onion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–30 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

F2J6 minimized first-month physiological weight loss.

Taxon
onionAllium cepat0
Treatment
F2J6 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @750 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @5%)e0
Outcome
PLW at 1st monthe0
Direction
minimume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“minimum PLW at 1st month was reported in F2J6 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @750 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @5%) and F1J5 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @500 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @ 5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1072–1285 · show in text ↑
t0

“onion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–30 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

F1J5 minimized first-month physiological weight loss.

Taxon
onionAllium cepat0
Treatment
F1J5 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @500 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @ 5%)e0
Outcome
PLW at 1st monthe0
Direction
minimume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“minimum PLW at 1st month was reported in F2J6 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @750 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @5%) and F1J5 (80% RDF + basal application of jeevamrut @500 kg/ha + spray of jeevamrut @ 5%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1072–1285 · show in text ↑
t0

“onion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–30 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend 80% RDF with jeevamrut, FYM and sulfur for onion quality, shelf life and return.

Taxon
onionAllium cepae0
Outcome
good quality, shelf life and economics for higher returne0

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“application of 80 per cent RDF (80-40-40 kg NPK/ha) through chemical fertilizers with basal application of jeevamrut @ 750 kg/ha and spray of jeevamrut @ 5 per cent at fortnightly interval up to 4 months, in addition of 20 tonne FYM and 20 kg S/ha for getting good quality, shelf life and economics for higher return of rabi onion”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1316–1646 · show in text ↑

application · quality: sugar starch · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 16 positive, 2 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

fertilization · quality: postharvest · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

69 papers: 53 positive, 16 negative or no effect

52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

65 papers more in this group

See all 69 papers →

application · quality: postharvest · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree

22 papers: 22 positive, 0 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

18 papers more in this group

See all 22 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.