Abstract
Soil- and plant-based fertilizer recommendations hold promise for increasing farmers’ incomes with high-input crops such as cassava. Considering the significance of cassava for the food, nutritional, and economic security of a half billion people globally and the positive response of the crop to fertilizer and manure applications in terms of tuber yield and quality through starch improvement and cyanogenic glucoside reduction, these recommendations were validated and popularized in two districts of Kerala State. Soil and plant samples from nine major cassava-growing districts of Kerala were analyzed for soil reaction, organic carbon, and essential nutrients, which formed the basis for the recommendation. The soil-test-based recommendation [nitrogen (N)–phosphorus (P)–potassium (K)–zinc (Zn) at 82:6.3:68:2 kg ha−1 along with farmyard manure (FYM) at 6.25 t ha−1] resulted in the greatest benefit–cost ratio of 1.75 with improvements in tuber and soil quality.
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 3
Claim · model-written summary
The soil-test-based fertiliser recommendation produced the greatest benefit–cost ratio, 1.75, for cassava.
- Taxon
- Cassava
Manihot esculentat0 - Treatment
- nitrogen (N)–phosphorus (P)–potassium (K)–zinc (Zn) at 82:6.3:68:2 kg ha−1 along with farmyard manure (FYM) at 6.25 t ha−1e0
- Outcome
- benefit–cost ratioe0
- Direction
- greateste0
- Value
- 1.75e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cassava”
e0“The soil-test-based recommendation [nitrogen (N)–phosphorus (P)–potassium (K)–zinc (Zn) at 82:6.3:68:2 kg ha−1 along with farmyard manure (FYM) at 6.25 t ha−1] resulted in the greatest benefit–cost ratio of 1.75 with improvements in tuber and soil quality.”
Claim · model-written summary
The soil-test-based recommendation improved cassava tuber quality.
- Taxon
- CassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- soil-test-based recommendatione0
- Outcome
- tubere0
- Direction
- improvementse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cassava”
e0“The soil-test-based recommendation [nitrogen (N)–phosphorus (P)–potassium (K)–zinc (Zn) at 82:6.3:68:2 kg ha−1 along with farmyard manure (FYM) at 6.25 t ha−1] resulted in the greatest benefit–cost ratio of 1.75 with improvements in tuber and soil quality.”
Claim · model-written summary
The soil-test-based recommendation improved soil quality in cassava production.
- Taxon
- CassavaManihot esculentat0
- Treatment
- soil-test-based recommendatione0
- Outcome
- soil qualitye0
- Direction
- improvementse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Cassava”
e0“The soil-test-based recommendation [nitrogen (N)–phosphorus (P)–potassium (K)–zinc (Zn) at 82:6.3:68:2 kg ha−1 along with farmyard manure (FYM) at 6.25 t ha−1] resulted in the greatest benefit–cost ratio of 1.75 with improvements in tuber and soil quality.”
The same questions in other papers
zinc atom · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →nitrogen · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →fertilization · yield · Manihot esculenta (cassava)Positive and negative results
140 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
149 papers more in this group
See all 153 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.