Paper · 2007 · ORYZA- An International Journal on Rice

Performance of different slow release N fertilizer formulations on yield and nutrient uptake of rice in acidic soils of Kerala

Sam T. Kurumthottical; A. I. Jose

6
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A field experiment was conducted for three consecutive seasons comprising two wet (WS) and one dry season (DS) at the Agricultural Research Station, Mannuthy, Kerala Agricultural University (KAU), Thrissur to evaluate the efficacy of slow release fertilizer formulations in rice. The fertilizer formulations were adjusted to provide 90 kg N, 45 kg P2O5 and 45 kg K2O ha-1. Significant and maximum increase in crop yield parameters, yield, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency were observed with a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitor and a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and binder respectively in the first crop during wet season. However, during the dry season, the recommended package of practice (POP) of KAU, which envisages normal split applications of straight fertilizers, has taken a significant lead. The slow release fertilizer formulations were observed to be more effective than straight fertilizers in wet season. The residual effect on yield and yield attributes were small in the third crop. Though, they performed exceedingly well when compared to control.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitor produced a significant maximum increase in crop yield parameters, yield in the first wet-season crop.

Treatment
a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitore0
Outcome
crop yield parameters, yielde0
Direction
increasee0
Comparator
controle1
Setting
wet seasone0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant and maximum increase in crop yield parameters, yield, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency were observed with a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitor and a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and binder respectively in the first crop during wet season.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 373–810 · show in text ↑
t0

“rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–100 · show in text ↑
e1

“Though, they performed exceedingly well when compared to control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1187–1252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitor produced a significant maximum increase in nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency in the first wet-season crop.

Treatment
a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitore0
Outcome
nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiencye0
Direction
increasee0
Comparator
controle1
Setting
wet seasone0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant and maximum increase in crop yield parameters, yield, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency were observed with a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitor and a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and binder respectively in the first crop during wet season.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 373–810 · show in text ↑
t0

“rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–100 · show in text ↑
e1

“Though, they performed exceedingly well when compared to control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1187–1252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and binder produced a significant maximum increase in crop yield parameters, yield in the first wet-season crop.

Treatment
a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and bindere0
Outcome
crop yield parameters, yielde0
Direction
increasee0
Comparator
controle1
Setting
wet seasone0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant and maximum increase in crop yield parameters, yield, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency were observed with a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitor and a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and binder respectively in the first crop during wet season.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 373–810 · show in text ↑
t0

“rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–100 · show in text ↑
e1

“Though, they performed exceedingly well when compared to control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1187–1252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and binder produced a significant maximum increase in nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency in the first wet-season crop.

Treatment
a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and bindere0
Outcome
nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiencye0
Direction
increasee0
Comparator
controle1
Setting
wet seasone0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant and maximum increase in crop yield parameters, yield, nutrient uptake and nutrient use efficiency were observed with a mixture comprising of Factomphos, Urea, muriate of potash (MOP) with Gypsum as physical barrier and neem cake as nitrification inhibitor and a spike formulation comprising of Factomphos, Ammonium sulphate, MOP with Gypsum and neem cake as filler and binder respectively in the first crop during wet season.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 373–810 · show in text ↑
t0

“rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–100 · show in text ↑
e1

“Though, they performed exceedingly well when compared to control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1187–1252 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The recommended package of practice led during the dry season.

Treatment
recommended package of practice (POP) of KAUe0
Outcome
significant leade0
Direction
leade0
Setting
dry seasone0

Not reportedComparator

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“However, during the dry season, the recommended package of practice (POP) of KAU, which envisages normal split applications of straight fertilizers, has taken a significant lead.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 811–989 · show in text ↑
t0

“rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–100 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Slow-release formulations were more effective than straight fertilizers in the wet season.

Treatment
slow release fertilizer formulationse0
Outcome
more effectivee0
Direction
more effectivee0
Comparator
straight fertilizerse0
Setting
wet seasone0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The slow release fertilizer formulations were observed to be more effective than straight fertilizers in wet season.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 990–1106 · show in text ↑
t0

“rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–100 · show in text ↑

ammonium sulfate · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

potassium chloride · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

25 papers: 23 positive, 2 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

21 papers more in this group

See all 25 papers →

ammonium sulfate · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

35 papers: 26 positive, 9 negative or no effect

25 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

31 papers more in this group

See all 35 papers →

potassium chloride · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

nitrification inhibitor · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

nitrification inhibitor · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Results agree

7 papers: 7 positive, 0 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

lime · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Results differ

136 papers: 123 positive, 13 negative or no effect

122 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

132 papers more in this group

See all 136 papers →

botanical · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Results differ

208 papers: 193 positive, 15 negative or no effect

192 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

204 papers more in this group

See all 208 papers →

8 of 15 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.

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.