Abstract
The response of hybrid maize varieties—Ganga 101 and Texas 26— to application of magnesium, zinc and other micronutrients has been reported. Soil application of 5–6 kg of zinc sulphate per ha in conjunction with NPK, magnesium and other micronutrients gave 18 to 32 per cent increase in yield over NPK alone. Under conditions of restricted drainage, zinc fertilization meant virtually the difference between success and failure of the crop. The soil application of zinc as well as other micronutrients was found to be superior to foliar application, seed soaking and seed coating. Application of magnesium with NPK not only benefitted the maize crop but also resulted in significant increase in the yield of the following wheat. Molybdenum did not have much effect on yield but increased the protein content of the maize grain.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Soil zinc sulphate with other nutrients increased maize yield by 18 to 32 per cent over NPK alone.
- Treatment
- Soil application of 5–6 kg of zinc sulphate per ha in conjunction with NPK, magnesium and other micronutrientse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 18 to 32 per cente0
- Comparator
- NPK alonee0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil application of 5–6 kg of zinc sulphate per ha in conjunction with NPK, magnesium and other micronutrients gave 18 to 32 per cent increase in yield over NPK alone”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
With restricted drainage, zinc fertilization was critical to maize crop success.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under conditions of restricted drainage, zinc fertilization meant virtually the difference between success and failure of the crop”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil application of micronutrients surpassed foliar, soaking and coating applications.
- Treatment
- soil application of zinc as well as other micronutrientse0
- Outcome
- superiore0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Comparator
- foliar application, seed soaking and seed coatinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The soil application of zinc as well as other micronutrients was found to be superior to foliar application, seed soaking and seed coating”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Magnesium with NPK benefited the maize crop.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of magnesium with NPK not only benefitted the maize crop but also resulted in significant increase in the yield of the following wheat”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Magnesium with NPK significantly increased the yield of the following wheat.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- Application of magnesium with NPKe0
- Outcome
- yield of the following wheate0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Application of magnesium with NPK not only benefitted the maize crop but also resulted in significant increase in the yield of the following wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Molybdenum had little effect on maize yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Molybdenum did not have much effect on yield but increased the protein content of the maize grain”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Molybdenum increased maize grain protein content.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Molybdenum did not have much effect on yield but increased the protein content of the maize grain”
t0“Maize”
The same questions in other papers
magnesium atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →magnesium atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
43 papers more in this group
See all 47 papers →zinc sulfate · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
124 papers more in this group
See all 128 papers →molybdenum atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →magnesium atom · organism · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
molybdenum atom · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
micronutrient · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
76 papers more in this group
See all 80 papers →fertilization · organism · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
136 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
158 papers more in this group
See all 162 papers →8 of 11 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.