Abstract
The experiment was conducted in randomized block design with 7 treatments and 4 replications, to evaluate the performance of some botanical products against the sucking pest of brinjal. The treatment included Triazophos 40E.C. 0.04%, Neem oil 1 %, Achook 5 %, NSKE 5%, Karanj oil 1%, Eucalyptus oil 1% and an untreated control. Four spraying of each treatment were conducted starting 30 days after transplanting, at an interval of 15 days. Observation on population of sucking pests (aphids and jassids) was recorded before treatment and 3, 7 and 10 days after each spraying. The results revealed that Triazophos 40E.C. 0.04% was significantly superior over all the botanical treatments. did not significantly shoot damage in different treatments ranged between 3.9 to 10.1%. Highest healthy fruits yield (24.76q/ha) was recorded in the treatment of Triazophos 40E.C. 0.04% followed by the treatment of neem oil 1% (20.54 q/ha healthy fruits), and both the treatments were statistically at par Yields in remaining treatments were at par and ranged between 19.57 and 15.23 q/ha. Lowest yield (10.50 q/ha healthy fruits) was registered in untreated control. Highest cost benefit ratio of 1:6. 31 were in treatment of Triazophos 40 EC 0.04%. Application of neem oil 1% registered the cost benefit ratio of 1:1.79 and found was most economical.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Triazophos was significantly superior to all botanical treatments.
- Taxon
- Brinjal
Solanum melongenat0 - Treatment
- Triazophos 40E.C. 0.04%e0
- Outcome
- significantly superiore0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Comparator
- all the botanical treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“Triazophos 40E.C. 0.04% was significantly superior over all the botanical treatments.”
Claim · model-written summary
Shoot damage across treatments ranged from 3.9 to 10.1%.
- Taxon
- BrinjalSolanum melongenat0
- Outcome
- shoot damagee0
- Value
- 3.9 to 10.1%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“shoot damage in different treatments ranged between 3.9 to 10.1%”
Claim · model-written summary
Triazophos produced the highest healthy fruit yield, 24.76q/ha.
- Taxon
- BrinjalSolanum melongenat0
- Treatment
- Triazophos 40E.C. 0.04%e0
- Outcome
- healthy fruits yielde0
- Direction
- Higheste0
- Value
- 24.76q/hae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“Highest healthy fruits yield (24.76q/ha) was recorded in the treatment of Triazophos 40E.C. 0.04%”
Claim · model-written summary
Neem oil produced 20.54 q/ha healthy fruits and was statistically at par with Triazophos.
- Taxon
- BrinjalSolanum melongenat0
- Treatment
- neem oil 1%e0
- Outcome
- healthy fruitse0
- Direction
- statistically at pare0
- Value
- 20.54 q/hae0
- Comparator
- both the treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“neem oil 1% (20.54 q/ha healthy fruits), and both the treatments were statistically at par”
Claim · model-written summary
Yields in remaining treatments were at par and ranged from 19.57 to 15.23 q/ha.
- Taxon
- BrinjalSolanum melongenat0
- Outcome
- Yieldse0
- Value
- 19.57 and 15.23 q/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“Yields in remaining treatments were at par and ranged between 19.57 and 15.23 q/ha.”
Claim · model-written summary
Untreated brinjal had the lowest healthy fruit yield, 10.50 q/ha.
- Taxon
- BrinjalSolanum melongenat0
- Treatment
- untreated controle0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- Loweste0
- Value
- 10.50 q/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“Lowest yield (10.50 q/ha healthy fruits) was registered in untreated control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Triazophos had the highest cost benefit ratio, 1:6. 31.
- Taxon
- BrinjalSolanum melongenat0
- Treatment
- Triazophos 40 EC 0.04%e0
- Outcome
- cost benefit ratioe0
- Direction
- Higheste0
- Value
- 1:6. 31e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“Highest cost benefit ratio of 1:6. 31 were in treatment of Triazophos 40 EC 0.04%.”
Claim · model-written summary
Neem oil had a cost benefit ratio of 1:1.79 and was described as most economical.
- Taxon
- BrinjalSolanum melongenat0
- Treatment
- neem oil 1%e0
- Outcome
- cost benefit ratioe0
- Value
- 1:1.79e0
- Qualifier
- most economicale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Efficacy of Botanical Pesticides against Sucking Insects Pests in Brinjal”
e0“Application of neem oil 1% registered the cost benefit ratio of 1:1.79 and found was most economical.”
The same questions in other papers
triazophos · yield · Solanum melongena (eggplant)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
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.