Abstract
An experiment was conducted at Akure, rainforest zone of Nigeria to evaluate the effectiveness of neem leaf, wood ash extracts, modified neem leaf extract, Apron star 42WS and Karate 720EC as seed treatment and pest control in maize. The organic treatment extracts namely neem leaf extract, wood ash extract applied at 1200ml per hectare and modified neem leaf extract (1:1 ratio 600ml wood ash + 600ml neem leaf extract) were compared with Apron star 42WS (seed treatment), Karate 720EC and control treatment (no neem leaf, wood ash extracts nor Karate), replicated four times and arranged in randomized complete block design. The results showed that there were significant differences (P < 0.05) in the germination counts, insect population, number of damaged leaves, growth and yield parameters of maize under different treatments compared to the control treatment. The modified neem leaf extract performed better in germination counts, reduction of damaged leaves, insect population and yield of maize than the sole application of neem leaf and wood ash. For percentage germination counts, Apron star 42WS had 65% followed by modified neem leaf extract (57%), wood ash extract (51%), neem leaf extract (47%) respectively. Modified neem leaf extract increased the leaf area, plant height and stem girth of maize by 8%, 5% and 7% respectively compared to the neem leaf (sole) extract. Generally, modified neem leaf extract had the best values of maize growth parameters followed by Karate, neem leaf and wood ash extracts respectively. Modified neem leaf extract decreased significantly the insect population, number of damaged leaves and number of holes per plant in maize by 33%, 70% and 30% respectively compared to the neem leaf extract (sole). When compared to modified neem extract, Karate decreased the number of damaged leaves per sample plot by 33%. However, there was no significant difference between karate and modified neem extract for insect population. For yield parameters, modified neem leaf extract significantly increased the maize yield gains by 15%, 14% and 2% compared to neem leaf, wood ash extracts and karate treatments respectively. However, wood ash and neem leaf extracts did not affect significantly the maize yield. Therefore, the modified neem leaf extract applied at 1200L/ha (3L/25m2) was most effective for pest control and seed treatment in maize crop.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 19
Claim · model-written summary
Treatments differed significantly in maize germination, insect population, damaged leaves, growth and yield.
- Treatment
- different treatmentse0
- Outcome
- germination counts, insect population, number of damaged leaves, growth and yield parameterse0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Zea maysNot reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there were significant differences (P < 0.05) in the germination counts, insect population, number of damaged leaves, growth and yield parameters of maize under different treatments compared to the control treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Apron star 42WS had 65% germination.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Schema note from the model: Outcome in preceding clause
Verbatim
e0“Apron star 42WS had 65%”
e1“For percentage germination counts, Apron star 42WS had 65% followed by modified neem leaf extract (57%), wood ash extract (51%), neem leaf extract (47%) respectively.”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract had 57% germination.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Schema note from the model: Outcome in preceding clause
Verbatim
e0“modified neem leaf extract (57%)”
e1“For percentage germination counts, Apron star 42WS had 65% followed by modified neem leaf extract (57%), wood ash extract (51%), neem leaf extract (47%) respectively.”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Wood ash extract had 51% germination.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Schema note from the model: Outcome in preceding clause
Verbatim
e0“wood ash extract (51%)”
e1“For percentage germination counts, Apron star 42WS had 65% followed by modified neem leaf extract (57%), wood ash extract (51%), neem leaf extract (47%) respectively.”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Neem leaf extract had 47% germination.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Schema note from the model: Outcome in preceding clause
Verbatim
e0“neem leaf extract (47%)”
e1“For percentage germination counts, Apron star 42WS had 65% followed by modified neem leaf extract (57%), wood ash extract (51%), neem leaf extract (47%) respectively.”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract increased maize leaf area by 8% relative to neem leaf extract.
- Treatment
- Modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- leaf areae0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 8%e0
- Comparator
- neem leaf (sole) extracte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modified neem leaf extract increased the leaf area, plant height and stem girth of maize by 8%, 5% and 7% respectively compared to the neem leaf (sole) extract”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract increased maize height by 5% relative to neem leaf extract.
- Treatment
- Modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- plant heighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 5%e0
- Comparator
- neem leaf (sole) extracte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modified neem leaf extract increased the leaf area, plant height and stem girth of maize by 8%, 5% and 7% respectively compared to the neem leaf (sole) extract”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract increased maize stem girth by 7% relative to neem leaf extract.
- Treatment
- Modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- stem girthe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 7%e0
- Comparator
- neem leaf (sole) extracte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modified neem leaf extract increased the leaf area, plant height and stem girth of maize by 8%, 5% and 7% respectively compared to the neem leaf (sole) extract”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract reduced insect population by 33% relative to neem leaf extract.
- Treatment
- Modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- insect populatione0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 33%e0
- Comparator
- neem leaf extract (sole)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modified neem leaf extract decreased significantly the insect population, number of damaged leaves and number of holes per plant in maize by 33%, 70% and 30% respectively compared to the neem leaf extract (sole)”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract reduced damaged leaves by 70% relative to neem leaf extract.
- Treatment
- Modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- number of damaged leavese0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 70%e0
- Comparator
- neem leaf extract (sole)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modified neem leaf extract decreased significantly the insect population, number of damaged leaves and number of holes per plant in maize by 33%, 70% and 30% respectively compared to the neem leaf extract (sole)”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract reduced holes per maize plant by 30% relative to neem leaf extract.
- Treatment
- Modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- number of holes per plante0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 30%e0
- Comparator
- neem leaf extract (sole)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Modified neem leaf extract decreased significantly the insect population, number of damaged leaves and number of holes per plant in maize by 33%, 70% and 30% respectively compared to the neem leaf extract (sole)”
Claim · model-written summary
Karate reduced damaged leaves by 33% relative to modified neem extract.
- Treatment
- Karatee0
- Outcome
- number of damaged leaves per sample plote0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 33%e0
- Comparator
- modified neem extracte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When compared to modified neem extract, Karate decreased the number of damaged leaves per sample plot by 33%”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Karate and modified neem extract did not differ significantly in insect population.
- Treatment
- karatee0
- Outcome
- insect populatione0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Comparator
- modified neem extracte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was no significant difference between karate and modified neem extract for insect population”
t0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract raised maize yield by 15% versus neem leaf extract.
- Treatment
- modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- maize yield gainse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Comparator
- neem leafe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“modified neem leaf extract significantly increased the maize yield gains by 15%, 14% and 2% compared to neem leaf, wood ash extracts and karate treatments respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract raised maize yield by 14% versus wood ash extract.
- Treatment
- modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- maize yield gainse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 14%e0
- Comparator
- wood ash extractse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“modified neem leaf extract significantly increased the maize yield gains by 15%, 14% and 2% compared to neem leaf, wood ash extracts and karate treatments respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Modified neem leaf extract raised maize yield by 2% versus karate.
- Treatment
- modified neem leaf extracte0
- Outcome
- maize yield gainse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2%e0
- Comparator
- karate treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“modified neem leaf extract significantly increased the maize yield gains by 15%, 14% and 2% compared to neem leaf, wood ash extracts and karate treatments respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Wood ash extract did not significantly affect maize yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wood ash and neem leaf extracts did not affect significantly the maize yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Neem leaf extract did not significantly affect maize yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wood ash and neem leaf extracts did not affect significantly the maize yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors recommend modified neem leaf extract for pest control and maize seed treatment.
- Treatment
- modified neem leaf extract applied at 1200L/ha (3L/25m2)e0
- Outcome
- pest control and seed treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the modified neem leaf extract applied at 1200L/ha (3L/25m2) was most effective for pest control and seed treatment in maize crop”
The same questions in other papers
Azadirachta indica · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →Azadirachta indica · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
13 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →Azadirachta indica · pest · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
13 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →botanical · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
117 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
121 papers more in this group
See all 125 papers →botanical · pest · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
86 papers more in this group
See all 90 papers →botanical · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
197 papers in the same direction as this paper · 140 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
336 papers more in this group
See all 340 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.