Abstract
1 Abstract: Field experiments were carried out to study the effect of different tillage methods on yield and quality of sugar beet. Tillage treatments were moldboard plow + two passes of disk harrow (MDD) and moldboard plow + one pass of rotavator (MR) as conventional tillage methods; chisel plow + one pass of rotavator (CR) and two passes of disk harrow (DD) as reduced tillage methods; one pass of rotavator (R) and one pass of tine cultivator (C) as minimum tillage methods and no-tillage (NT). The root yield and quality characteristics of sugar beet viz., sugar content, K, Na, alpha-amino nitrogen and molasses were measured for different tillage treatments. Results of the study indicated that different tillage methods significantly (P=0.05) affected K, but no significant differences were found in root yield, sugar content, Na, alpha-amino nitrogen and molasses. Although there was no significant difference in most studied traits, tillage operations were useful in improving the root yield and quality characteristics of sugar beet.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage methods significantly affected sugar beet K.
- Taxon
- Sugar Beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- different tillage methodse0
- Outcome
- Ke0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“different tillage methods significantly (P=0.05) affected K”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage methods showed no significant differences in root yield, sugar content, and Na.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- root yield, sugar content, Nae0
- Direction
- no significant differencese0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant differences were found in root yield, sugar content, Na, alpha-amino nitrogen and molasses”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Tillage methods showed no significant differences in alpha-amino nitrogen and molasses.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- alpha-amino nitrogen and molassese0
- Direction
- no significant differencese0
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no significant differences were found in root yield, sugar content, Na, alpha-amino nitrogen and molasses”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors concluded tillage improved sugar beet root yield and quality characteristics.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- tillage operationse0
- Outcome
- root yield and quality characteristicse0
- Direction
- improvinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tillage operations were useful in improving the root yield and quality characteristics of sugar beet”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · quality: general · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.