Paper · 1995 · Nematologia Mediterranea (Italy)

EFFICACY OF SOME NEW SOIL AMENDMENTS FOR THE CONTROL OF THE LESION NEMATODE IN SUGARCANE

Usha K. Mehta; P. Sundararaj

3
claims
9
verbatim quotes
5
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The efficacy of organic amendments viz., naemin, neemark, farmyard manure, press mud and Calotropis procera were compared with the chemical nematicide carbofuran for the control of Pratylenchus zeae on sugarcane. Application of all treatments increased the growth of plants, as measured by shoot and root length and weight, with neemark giving the best results.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Naemin increased sugarcane shoot and root length and weight.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
naemine1
Interactor
Pratylenchus zeaePratylenchus zeaee1pest
Outcome
shoot and root length and weighte0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pratylenchus zeae
Pratylenchus zeae · InteractorUSDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Application of all treatments increased the growth of plants, as measured by shoot and root length and weight, with neemark giving the best results”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 213–360 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGARCANE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–88 · show in text ↑
e1

“The efficacy of organic amendments viz., naemin, neemark, farmyard manure, press mud and Calotropis procera were compared with the chemical nematicide carbofuran for the control of Pratylenchus zeae on sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–212 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Neemark increased sugarcane growth and gave the best results.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
neemarke0
Outcome
shoot and root length and weighte0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Application of all treatments increased the growth of plants, as measured by shoot and root length and weight, with neemark giving the best results”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 213–360 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGARCANE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–88 · show in text ↑
e1

“The efficacy of organic amendments viz., naemin, neemark, farmyard manure, press mud and Calotropis procera were compared with the chemical nematicide carbofuran for the control of Pratylenchus zeae on sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–212 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Farmyard manure increased sugarcane shoot and root length and weight.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
farmyard manuree1
Outcome
shoot and root length and weighte0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Application of all treatments increased the growth of plants, as measured by shoot and root length and weight, with neemark giving the best results”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 213–360 · show in text ↑
t0

“SUGARCANE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–88 · show in text ↑
e1

“The efficacy of organic amendments viz., naemin, neemark, farmyard manure, press mud and Calotropis procera were compared with the chemical nematicide carbofuran for the control of Pratylenchus zeae on sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–212 · show in text ↑

fertilization · growth · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

147 papers: 129 positive, 18 negative or no effect

128 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

143 papers more in this group

See all 147 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.