Abstract
A field experiment was conducted during 2000-01 and 2001 -02 at Pusa, Bihar to study weed growth, nutrient removal, weed-control efficiency and yield, and nutrient uptake by wheat (Triticurn aestivurn L. emend. Fiori & Paol.) as influenced by planting pattern [criss-cross (20 cm x 20 cm), normal line sowing (20 cm) and broadcast] as well as weed-control treatment [weedy check, hand-weeding (30 days after sowing), isoproturon @ 0.75 kg/ ha (pre-emergence), sulfosulfuron @ 33.3 glha (post-emergence) and 2,4-D Na salt @ 0.80 kglha (post-emer- gence)]. Criss-cross sowing significantly reduced the weed biomass and hence lowered the nutrient depletion by weeds, ultimately resulting in higher nutrient uptake and yield of wheat crop. Normal line sowing and broadcast- ing methods recorded 7.29 and 19.93% less grain yield than criss-cross sowing. Amongst the weed-control treat- ments, post-emergence application of sulfosulfuron was found on a par with hand weeding treatment for control- ling weeds and producing grain yield of wheat. The different weed-control measures led to 119.5-139.0, 123.2- 141.3 and 120.4-138.5% increase in N, P and K uptake by wheat respectively, and 59.9-74.6, 60.2-75.0 and 60.0-75.5% reduction in the depletion by weeds over the weedy check.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Criss-cross sowing significantly reduced weed biomass.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- Criss-cross sowinge0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- weed biomasse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Criss-cross sowing significantly reduced the weed biomass and hence lowered the nutrient depletion by weeds, ultimately resulting in higher nutrient uptake and yield of wheat crop.”
Claim · model-written summary
Criss-cross sowing lowered nutrient depletion by weeds.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Criss-cross sowinge0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- nutrient depletion by weedse0
- Direction
- lowerede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Criss-cross sowing significantly reduced the weed biomass and hence lowered the nutrient depletion by weeds, ultimately resulting in higher nutrient uptake and yield of wheat crop.”
Claim · model-written summary
Criss-cross sowing increased wheat nutrient uptake.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Criss-cross sowinge0
- Outcome
- nutrient uptakee0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Criss-cross sowing significantly reduced the weed biomass and hence lowered the nutrient depletion by weeds, ultimately resulting in higher nutrient uptake and yield of wheat crop.”
Claim · model-written summary
Criss-cross sowing increased wheat yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Criss-cross sowinge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Criss-cross sowing significantly reduced the weed biomass and hence lowered the nutrient depletion by weeds, ultimately resulting in higher nutrient uptake and yield of wheat crop.”
Claim · model-written summary
Normal line sowing yielded 7.29% less grain than criss-cross sowing.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Normal line sowinge0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 7.29e0
- Comparator
- criss-cross sowinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Normal line sowing and broadcast- ing methods recorded 7.29 and 19.93% less grain yield than criss-cross sowing.”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Broadcasting yielded 19.93% less grain than criss-cross sowing.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- broadcast- inge0
- Outcome
- grain yielde0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 19.93%e0
- Comparator
- criss-cross sowinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Normal line sowing and broadcast- ing methods recorded 7.29 and 19.93% less grain yield than criss-cross sowing.”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfosulfuron was on par with hand weeding for weed control and wheat grain yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- post-emergence application of sulfosulfurone0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- control- ling weeds and producing grain yielde0
- Direction
- on a pare0
- Comparator
- hand weeding treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“post-emergence application of sulfosulfuron was found on a par with hand weeding treatment for control- ling weeds and producing grain yield of wheat.”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control increased wheat N uptake by 119.5–139.0% over weedy check.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- different weed-control measurese0
- Outcome
- N, P and K uptakee0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 119.5-139.0e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The different weed-control measures led to 119.5-139.0, 123.2- 141.3 and 120.4-138.5% increase in N, P and K uptake by wheat respectively, and 59.9-74.6, 60.2-75.0 and 60.0-75.5% reduction in the depletion by weeds over the weedy check.”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control increased wheat P uptake by 123.2–141.3% over weedy check.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- different weed-control measurese0
- Outcome
- Pe0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 123.2- 141.3e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The different weed-control measures led to 119.5-139.0, 123.2- 141.3 and 120.4-138.5% increase in N, P and K uptake by wheat respectively, and 59.9-74.6, 60.2-75.0 and 60.0-75.5% reduction in the depletion by weeds over the weedy check.”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control increased wheat K uptake by 120.4–138.5% over weedy check.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- different weed-control measurese0
- Outcome
- K uptakee0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 120.4-138.5%e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The different weed-control measures led to 119.5-139.0, 123.2- 141.3 and 120.4-138.5% increase in N, P and K uptake by wheat respectively, and 59.9-74.6, 60.2-75.0 and 60.0-75.5% reduction in the depletion by weeds over the weedy check.”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control reduced N depletion by weeds by 59.9–74.6% over weedy check.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- weed-control measurese0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- depletion by weedse0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 59.9-74.6e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The different weed-control measures led to 119.5-139.0, 123.2- 141.3 and 120.4-138.5% increase in N, P and K uptake by wheat respectively, and 59.9-74.6, 60.2-75.0 and 60.0-75.5% reduction in the depletion by weeds over the weedy check.”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control reduced P depletion by weeds by 60.2–75.0% over weedy check.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- weed-control measurese0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- depletion by weedse0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 60.2-75.0e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The different weed-control measures led to 119.5-139.0, 123.2- 141.3 and 120.4-138.5% increase in N, P and K uptake by wheat respectively, and 59.9-74.6, 60.2-75.0 and 60.0-75.5% reduction in the depletion by weeds over the weedy check.”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed control reduced K depletion by weeds by 60.0–75.5% over weedy check.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- weed-control measurese0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- depletion by weedse0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 60.0-75.5%e0
- Comparator
- weedy checke0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The different weed-control measures led to 119.5-139.0, 123.2- 141.3 and 120.4-138.5% increase in N, P and K uptake by wheat respectively, and 59.9-74.6, 60.2-75.0 and 60.0-75.5% reduction in the depletion by weeds over the weedy check.”
t0“wheat”
The same questions in other papers
herbicide · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 papers →transplanting · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 129 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
172 papers more in this group
See all 176 papers →herbicide · weed · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
361 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
397 papers more in this group
See all 401 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.