Abstract
Economic evaluation analysis of foliar (NPK) fertilizer on tea yields was investigated on three varieties of tea grown in the Kenyan Highlands. Foliar fertilizers trial was setup on three sites, Meru, Kirinyaga and Kericho, comprising of 36 plots per site. Two foliar fertilizer types, Foliar Fertilizer 1 (FF1) and Foliar Fertilizer 2 (FF2), a positive control of Soil Fertilizer (SF) and a blank (FF0) were used to standardize the method. Yield analysis in Meru site showed significant increase (HSD=4.9, p?0.05) after FF1 full rate application. SF had significant yield increases for all its rates from zero rate (HSD= 49, 44, 19, p?0.05) for half, full and double rates respectively. FF2 had no yield increase after its application. The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site; half rate for all fertilizer types Kirinyaga site; double rate for FF2 and SF and full rate for FF1 in Meru site. The profitable rates were: double rate for SF across all sites and for FF1 and FF2 in Meru site; full rate for FF1 and half rate for FF2 in Kericho and Kirinyaga sites respectively.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
FF1 full rate significantly increased yield at Meru.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“Yield analysis in Meru site showed significant increase (HSD=4.9, p?0.05) after FF1 full rate application”
Claim · model-written summary
SF significantly increased yield at half, full and double rates compared with zero rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“SF had significant yield increases for all its rates from zero rate (HSD= 49, 44, 19, p?0.05) for half, full and double rates respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
FF2 did not increase yield after application.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“FF2 had no yield increase after its application”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic rate for FF1 at Kericho was full rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic rate for SF at Kericho was full rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic rate for FF2 at Kericho was half rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic rate for all fertilizer types at Kirinyaga was half rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site; half rate for all fertilizer types Kirinyaga site”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic rate for FF2 at Meru was double rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site; half rate for all fertilizer types Kirinyaga site; double rate for FF2 and SF and full rate for FF1 in Meru site”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic rate for SF at Meru was double rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site; half rate for all fertilizer types Kirinyaga site; double rate for FF2 and SF and full rate for FF1 in Meru site”
Claim · model-written summary
The economic rate for FF1 at Meru was full rate.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“The economic rates were determined to be full rate for FF1 and SF and half rate for FF2 in Kericho site; half rate for all fertilizer types Kirinyaga site; double rate for FF2 and SF and full rate for FF1 in Meru site”
Claim · model-written summary
Double rate SF was profitable across all sites.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“double rate for SF across all sites”
Claim · model-written summary
Double rate FF1 was profitable at Meru.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“double rate for SF across all sites and for FF1 and FF2 in Meru site”
Claim · model-written summary
Double rate FF2 was profitable at Meru.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“double rate for SF across all sites and for FF1 and FF2 in Meru site”
Claim · model-written summary
Full rate FF1 was profitable at Kericho.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“full rate for FF1 and half rate for FF2 in Kericho and Kirinyaga sites respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Half rate FF2 was profitable at Kirinyaga.
Verbatim
t0“Tea”
e0“full rate for FF1 and half rate for FF2 in Kericho and Kirinyaga sites respectively”
The same questions in other papers
application · yield · Camellia sinensis (black tea)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →fertilization · yield · Camellia sinensis (black tea)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 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.