Paper · 2020 · International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences

SRI-Finger Millet Cultivation a Case Study in Tumakuru District, India

Soma shekhar; N. Loganandhan

5
claims
11
verbatim quotes
4
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

System of Finger millet intensification or SRI-finger millet cultivation is a method of cultivating finger millet by applying cultivation principles adopted in SRI (System of Rice Intensification) in order to get higher productivity. This method is also called as Guli type of Planting. This POP developed for SRI-Finger Millet is an integration of the farmers’ practice and standard practices of finger millet cultivation along with two levels of two doses of fertilizers. Here an effort has been made to know the potentiality of this finger millet cultivation to increase the productivity of the Ragi crop was taken during 2015-16 kharif season at KVK Farm Hirehalli of Tumakauru district in Karnataka state. Tillering starts after the first weeding. On an average 8-10 tillers per hill emerge, out of which 6-8 become productive and bear the fingers. More number of Tillers was observed in T4- 60 x 30 cm with 100% RDF - single seedling followed by T3 -60x 30 cm with 50% RDF and finally highest Ragi yield was obtained in the same treatment T4 with quantity of 2452 kg/ha followed by 2361 kg/ha in T3.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 60 x 30 cm spacing with 100% RDF and single seedling produced more tillers than 60 x 30 cm with 50% RDF.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanat0
Treatment
60 x 30 cm with 100% RDF - single seedlinge1
Outcome
number of Tillerse1
Direction
Moree1
Comparator
T3 -60x 30 cm with 50% RDFe1
Setting
KVK Farm Hirehalli of Tumakauru districte3

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“SRI-Finger Millet Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–29 · show in text ↑
e1

“More number of Tillers was observed in T4- 60 x 30 cm with 100% RDF - single seedling followed by T3 -60x 30 cm with 50% RDF”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 854–978 · show in text ↑
e3

“during 2015-16 kharif season at KVK Farm Hirehalli of Tumakauru district in Karnataka state”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 618–709 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatment T4 gave the highest finger millet (Ragi) yield, 2452 kg/ha, compared with T3.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanat0
Treatment
T4e2
Outcome
Ragi yielde2
Direction
higheste2
Value
2452 kg/hae2
Comparator
T3e2

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“SRI-Finger Millet Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–29 · show in text ↑
e2

“highest Ragi yield was obtained in the same treatment T4 with quantity of 2452 kg/ha followed by 2361 kg/ha in T3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 991–1104 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatment T3 gave a finger millet (Ragi) yield of 2361 kg/ha, second to T4.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanat0
Treatment
T3e2
Outcome
Ragi yielde2
Value
2361 kg/hae2

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“SRI-Finger Millet Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–29 · show in text ↑
e2

“highest Ragi yield was obtained in the same treatment T4 with quantity of 2452 kg/ha followed by 2361 kg/ha in T3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 991–1104 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Finger millet emerged 8-10 tillers per hill after the first weeding.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanat0
Outcome
tillers per hille0
Value
8-10 tillerse0

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“SRI-Finger Millet Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–29 · show in text ↑
e0

“On an average 8-10 tillers per hill emerge, out of which 6-8 become productive and bear the fingers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 753–852 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Of the tillers per hill, 6-8 became productive and bore fingers.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanat0
Outcome
become productivee0
Value
6-8e0

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“SRI-Finger Millet Cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–29 · show in text ↑
e0

“On an average 8-10 tillers per hill emerge, out of which 6-8 become productive and bear the fingers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 753–852 · show in text ↑

fertilization · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Positive and negative results

174 papers: 171 positive, 3 negative or no effect

170 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

170 papers more in this group

See all 174 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.