Abstract
Abstract Dry season vegetable production is challenging due to water scarcity, a drawback on sustaining year‐round crop production. Biochar improves soil moisture and nutrient retention and may be used to improve vegetable water productivity. We examined the combined effect of rice straw biochar and irrigation on yield, water productivity, and phosphorus (P) uptake of okra ( Abelmoschus esculentus L.) grown on a sandy clay loam soil in the dry season. Biochar was applied at 0, 5, 10 Mg ha −1 , and 10 Mg ha −1 biochar fortified with P [10 Mg ha −1 (P) ] under full irrigation (FI) and deficit irrigation (DI) and replicated in each growing season for three years. Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season. Biochar at 5 Mg ha −1 had no impact on okra yield. Okra yield was higher under biochar fortified with P compared to the traditional method of applying P alone, e.g. 30 Mg ha −1 (P) produced significantly higher Y TBM than 30 Mg ha −1 under DI. Biochar had no impact on P uptake in the first growing season. Estimated okra water use was 224 and 193 mm under FI and DI. Yield reduction under DI compared to FI was only 8%. Amid water scarcity, a minimum of 10 Mg ha −1 rice straw biochar under DI is therefore recommended for farmers in the area.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Under DI, 10 Mg ha −1 biochar significantly increased okra fresh fruit yield by 67%.
- Taxon
- okra
.jpg?width=60)
Abelmoschus esculentuse0 - Treatment
- 10 Mg ha −1e0
- Outcome
- fresh fruit yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 67e0
- Qualifier
- under DIe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
Claim · model-written summary
Under DI, 10 Mg ha −1 biochar fortified with P significantly increased okra fresh fruit yield by 82%.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Treatment
- 10 Mg ha −1 (P)e0
- Outcome
- fresh fruit yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 82%e0
- Qualifier
- under DIe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
Claim · model-written summary
Under DI, 10 Mg ha −1 biochar had no impact on okra total aboveground biomass yield in the first growing season.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Treatment
- 10 Mg ha −1e0
- Outcome
- total aboveground biomass yielde0
- Direction
- no impacte0
- Qualifier
- in the first growing seasone0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
Claim · model-written summary
Under DI, 10 Mg ha −1 biochar fortified with P had no impact on okra total aboveground biomass yield in the first growing season.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Treatment
- 10 Mg ha −1 (P)e0
- Outcome
- total aboveground biomass yielde0
- Direction
- no impacte0
- Qualifier
- in the first growing seasone0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar at 5 Mg ha −1 had no impact on okra yield.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse1
- Treatment
- 5 Mg ha −1e1
- Outcome
- okra yielde1
- Direction
- no impacte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Biochar at 5 Mg ha −1 had no impact on okra yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Okra yield was higher under biochar fortified with P than under the traditional method of applying P alone.
- Taxon
- OkraAbelmoschus esculentuse2
- Treatment
- biochar fortified with Pe2
- Outcome
- yielde2
- Direction
- highere2
- Comparator
- the traditional method of applying P alonee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Okra yield was higher under biochar fortified with P compared to the traditional method of applying P alone”
Claim · model-written summary
Under DI, 30 Mg ha −1 (P) produced significantly higher okra total aboveground biomass yield than 30 Mg ha −1.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Treatment
- 30 Mg ha −1 (P)e3
- Outcome
- Y TBMe3
- Direction
- highere3
- Qualifier
- under DIe3
- Comparator
- 30 Mg ha −1e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
e3“30 Mg ha −1 (P) produced significantly higher Y TBM than 30 Mg ha −1 under DI”
Claim · model-written summary
Biochar had no impact on phosphorus uptake by okra in the first growing season.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Treatment
- Biochare4
- Outcome
- P uptakee4
- Direction
- no impacte4
- Qualifier
- in the first growing seasone4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
e4“Biochar had no impact on P uptake in the first growing season”
Claim · model-written summary
Estimated okra water use was 224 mm under FI and 193 mm under DI.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse5
- Treatment
- FI and DIe5
- Outcome
- water usee5
- Value
- 224 and 193 mme5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“Estimated okra water use was 224 and 193 mm under FI and DI”
Claim · model-written summary
Under DI, okra yield was reduced by 8% compared with FI.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Treatment
- DIe6
- Outcome
- yielde6
- Direction
- reductione6
- Value
- 8%e6
- Comparator
- FIe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
e6“Yield reduction under DI compared to FI was only 8%. Amid water scarcity, a minimum of 10 Mg ha −1 rice straw biochar under DI is therefore recommended for farmers in the area”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend a minimum of 10 Mg ha −1 rice straw biochar under DI for okra farmers in the area, given water scarcity.
- Taxon
- okraAbelmoschus esculentuse0
- Outcome
- a minimum of 10 Mg ha −1 rice straw biochar under DIe6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under DI, the 10 Mg ha −1 and 10 Mg ha −1 (P) biochar treatments significantly (p < .05) increased okra fresh fruit yield (Y FF ) by 67 and 82% but had no impact on total aboveground biomass yield (Y TBM ) in the first growing season”
e6“Yield reduction under DI compared to FI was only 8%. Amid water scarcity, a minimum of 10 Mg ha −1 rice straw biochar under DI is therefore recommended for farmers in the area”
The same questions in other papers
biochar · nutrient: content · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →biochar · yield · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →irrigation · yield · Abelmoschus esculentus (okra)Positive and negative results
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 48 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
59 papers more in this group
See all 63 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.