Paper · 2020 · Colloquium Agrariae

Cultivo de amendoim em função da adubação e do espaçamento entre plantas em sistema de sequeiro e irrigação complementar

Antonio Alves Pinto; Leandro Alves Pinto; Laudeline Dantas Santana; et al.

9
claims
16
verbatim quotes
4
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

In the rigion Nordeste, the peanutis cultivated almost exclusively by family agriculture producers with low technological levels, in addition to the low use of inputs, essential to ensure better productivity. Objective to evaluate the performance and productivity of peanut subjected to doses of fertilization and spacing between plants, in the rainfed system and irrigation system. The experiment was conducted at the Federal University of cariri. Two experiments were conducted in randomized blocks in parcel scheme subdivided, with four replicates.The plots were four doses of fertilization on sowing (0, 50, 100 and 150%) and the subplots two spaces between plants (10 and 20 cm). The peanut cultivar used was the BRS151L7. Sowing was carried out manually, depositing-if 5 and 10 as the spacing between plants. The harvest was carried out manually to 90 days after sowing.The variables population initial and final population showed significant (p < 0.01) to the spacing between plants in system rainfed and irrigation system. The mass of plants and grains per plant showed significant difference to 1% in the spacing for the irrigation system. In the fertilizing factor, the height of plants was the only variable thatshowed significance (p < 0.05). The application of 80% of the recommended dose of phosphorus and potassium is enough to meet the need of culture. The 10 cm spacing between plants was the best for culture.The use of supplemental irrigation has increased by more than 300% the productivity of grain and peanut pods.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 9

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant spacing significantly affected initial peanut population under rainfed and irrigated systems.

Taxon
amendoimt0
Treatment
spacing between plantse0
Outcome
population initiale0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The variables population initial and final population showed significant (p < 0.01) to the spacing between plants in system rainfed and irrigation system.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 876–1030 · show in text ↑
t0

“amendoim”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 11–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant spacing significantly affected final peanut population under rainfed and irrigated systems.

Taxon
amendoimt0
Treatment
spacing between plantse0
Outcome
final populatione0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The variables population initial and final population showed significant (p < 0.01) to the spacing between plants in system rainfed and irrigation system.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 876–1030 · show in text ↑
t0

“amendoim”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 11–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant spacing significantly affected peanut plant mass under irrigation.

Taxon
amendoimt0
Treatment
spacinge0
Outcome
mass of plantse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The mass of plants and grains per plant showed significant difference to 1% in the spacing for the irrigation system.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1031–1148 · show in text ↑
t0

“amendoim”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 11–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant spacing significantly affected grains per peanut plant under irrigation.

Taxon
amendoimt0
Treatment
spacinge0
Outcome
grains per plante0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“The mass of plants and grains per plant showed significant difference to 1% in the spacing for the irrigation system.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1031–1148 · show in text ↑
t0

“amendoim”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 11–19 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization significantly affected peanut plant height.

Taxon
amendoimt0
Treatment
fertilizing factore0
Outcome
height of plantse0

Not reportedDirection

Verbatim

e0

“In the fertilizing factor, the height of plants was the only variable thatshowed significance (p < 0.05).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1149–1254 · show in text ↑
t0

“amendoim”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 11–19 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that 80% of recommended phosphorus and potassium meets peanut crop needs.

Taxon
amendoimt0
Outcome
80% of the recommended dose of phosphorus and potassiume0

Verbatim

e0

“The application of 80% of the recommended dose of phosphorus and potassium is enough to meet the need of culture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1255–1368 · show in text ↑
t0

“amendoim”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 11–19 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that 10 cm plant spacing is best for peanut.

Taxon
amendoimt0
Outcome
10 cm spacing between plantse0

Verbatim

e0

“The 10 cm spacing between plants was the best for culture.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1369–1427 · show in text ↑
t0

“amendoim”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 11–19 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Supplemental irrigation raised peanut grain productivity by over 300%.

Treatment
supplemental irrigatione0
Outcome
productivity of graine0
Direction
increasede0
Value
more than 300%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The use of supplemental irrigation has increased by more than 300% the productivity of grain and peanut pods.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1427–1536 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Supplemental irrigation raised peanut pod productivity by over 300%.

Treatment
supplemental irrigatione0
Outcome
peanut podse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
more than 300%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Arachis hypogaea
Arachis hypogaea · Taxon葉子 · CC0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The use of supplemental irrigation has increased by more than 300% the productivity of grain and peanut pods.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1427–1536 · show in text ↑

irrigation · organism · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 4 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

irrigation · yield · Arachis hypogaea (peanut)Positive and negative results

191 papers: 168 positive, 23 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

187 papers more in this group

See all 191 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.