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

Impact of ‘Integrated Crop Management Approach’ on Crop Yield and Economics in Amaravati and Yavatmal District (M.S.), India

Nandini Kelkar; Bharat Kakade; Ravi Kote; et al.

10
claims
15
verbatim quotes
1
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Adverse climatic changes and increasing demand of agro produces are forcing abuse of natural and artificial resources resulting not only in deterioration of soil health but also reduction in crop yields. In addition, rainfed crops add to the adversity. In presence of these issues, to increase the yield of majorly grown crops in Yavatmal and Amaravati districts, an effort has been made by following sustainable and integrated crop management practices in two subsequent years i.e. 2016-17 and 2017-18.The practices had a great impact on crop yield and economics in case of pigeon pea, cotton, soybean, wheat and gram. For the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, in case of pigeon pea, cotton, soybean, wheat and gram the overall increase in yield per ha over conventional farming practices was 21.98 and 31.25%, 20.58 and 30.00%, 22.86 and 32.93%, 20.83 and 30.35% 21.55 and 33.99%, respectively. The increase in yield due to integrated crop management approach resulted in additional income of 28.98 and 39.57% in case of pigeon pea, 40.93 and 42.07% in case of cotton, 36.16% and 79.54% in case of soybean, 56.42 and 55.00%in case of wheat and28.25 and 28.34% in case of gram in the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively. The outcome of the study indicated that there is need of awareness amongst farmer community for adopting integrated approach of crop management and a great scope for implementation of integrated, sustainable and holistic approach for crop production in future.

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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pigeon pea yield increased in 2016-17 and 2017-18 versus conventional farming.

Taxon
pigeon peaCajanus cajane0
Treatment
integrated crop management practicese1
Outcome
yield per hae0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
21.98 and 31.25%e0
Qualifier
2016-17 and 2017-18e0
Comparator
conventional farming practicese0

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

Cajanus cajan
Cajanus cajan · TaxonFilo gèn' · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“For the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, in case of pigeon pea, cotton, soybean, wheat and gram the overall increase in yield per ha over conventional farming practices was 21.98 and 31.25%, 20.58 and 30.00%, 22.86 and 32.93%, 20.83 and 30.35% 21.55 and 33.99%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–888 · show in text ↑
e1

“sustainable and integrated crop management practices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 401–453 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cotton yield increased in both years.

Treatment
integrated crop management practicese1
Outcome
yield per hae0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
20.58 and 30.00%e0
Comparator
conventional farming practicese0

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“For the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, in case of pigeon pea, cotton, soybean, wheat and gram the overall increase in yield per ha over conventional farming practices was 21.98 and 31.25%, 20.58 and 30.00%, 22.86 and 32.93%, 20.83 and 30.35% 21.55 and 33.99%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–888 · show in text ↑
e1

“sustainable and integrated crop management practices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 401–453 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soybean yield increased in both years.

Taxon
soybeanGlycine maxe0
Treatment
integrated crop management practicese1
Outcome
yield per hae0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
22.86 and 32.93%e0
Comparator
conventional farming practicese0

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

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“For the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, in case of pigeon pea, cotton, soybean, wheat and gram the overall increase in yield per ha over conventional farming practices was 21.98 and 31.25%, 20.58 and 30.00%, 22.86 and 32.93%, 20.83 and 30.35% 21.55 and 33.99%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–888 · show in text ↑
e1

“sustainable and integrated crop management practices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 401–453 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield increased in both years.

Treatment
integrated crop management practicese1
Outcome
yield per hae0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
20.83 and 30.35%e0
Comparator
conventional farming practicese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“For the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, in case of pigeon pea, cotton, soybean, wheat and gram the overall increase in yield per ha over conventional farming practices was 21.98 and 31.25%, 20.58 and 30.00%, 22.86 and 32.93%, 20.83 and 30.35% 21.55 and 33.99%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–888 · show in text ↑
e1

“sustainable and integrated crop management practices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 401–453 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gram yield increased in both years.

Taxon
grame0
Treatment
integrated crop management practicese1
Outcome
yield per hae0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
21.55 and 33.99%e0
Comparator
conventional farming practicese0

Verbatim

e0

“For the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, in case of pigeon pea, cotton, soybean, wheat and gram the overall increase in yield per ha over conventional farming practices was 21.98 and 31.25%, 20.58 and 30.00%, 22.86 and 32.93%, 20.83 and 30.35% 21.55 and 33.99%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 620–888 · show in text ↑
e1

“sustainable and integrated crop management practices”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 401–453 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

pigeon pea additional income increased in 2016-17 and 2017-18.

Taxon
pigeon peaCajanus cajane0
Treatment
integrated crop management approache0
Outcome
additional incomee0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
28.98 and 39.57%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cajanus cajan
Cajanus cajan · TaxonFilo gèn' · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The increase in yield due to integrated crop management approach resulted in additional income of 28.98 and 39.57% in case of pigeon pea, 40.93 and 42.07% in case of cotton, 36.16% and 79.54% in case of soybean, 56.42 and 55.00%in case of wheat and28.25 and 28.34% in case of gram in the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1216 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

cotton additional income increased in 2016-17 and 2017-18.

Treatment
integrated crop management approache0
Outcome
additional incomee0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
40.93 and 42.07%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The increase in yield due to integrated crop management approach resulted in additional income of 28.98 and 39.57% in case of pigeon pea, 40.93 and 42.07% in case of cotton, 36.16% and 79.54% in case of soybean, 56.42 and 55.00%in case of wheat and28.25 and 28.34% in case of gram in the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1216 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

soybean additional income increased in 2016-17 and 2017-18.

Taxon
soybeanGlycine maxe0
Treatment
integrated crop management approache0
Outcome
additional incomee0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
36.16% and 79.54%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Glycine max
Glycine max · TaxonPublic domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The increase in yield due to integrated crop management approach resulted in additional income of 28.98 and 39.57% in case of pigeon pea, 40.93 and 42.07% in case of cotton, 36.16% and 79.54% in case of soybean, 56.42 and 55.00%in case of wheat and28.25 and 28.34% in case of gram in the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1216 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

wheat additional income increased in 2016-17 and 2017-18.

Treatment
integrated crop management approache0
Outcome
additional incomee0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
56.42 and 55.00%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The increase in yield due to integrated crop management approach resulted in additional income of 28.98 and 39.57% in case of pigeon pea, 40.93 and 42.07% in case of cotton, 36.16% and 79.54% in case of soybean, 56.42 and 55.00%in case of wheat and28.25 and 28.34% in case of gram in the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1216 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

gram additional income increased in 2016-17 and 2017-18.

Taxon
grame0
Treatment
integrated crop management approache0
Outcome
additional incomee0
Direction
increaseinferrede0
Value
28.25 and 28.34%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The increase in yield due to integrated crop management approach resulted in additional income of 28.98 and 39.57% in case of pigeon pea, 40.93 and 42.07% in case of cotton, 36.16% and 79.54% in case of soybean, 56.42 and 55.00%in case of wheat and28.25 and 28.34% in case of gram in the year 2016-17 and 2017-18, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 889–1216 · show in text ↑

ipm · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 12 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
    Crop yield differed negligibly between IPM and farmer practice.

    Demonstrating an integrated pest management strategy in autumnsown wheat to arable farmers · 2010 · compared with participating farmers current pest management practices

    No difference from an alternative

  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

ipm · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 20 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

cultivation system · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

30 papers: 25 positive, 5 negative or no effect

24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

cultivation system · yield · Glycine max (soybean)Positive and negative results

63 papers: 35 positive, 28 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

59 papers more in this group

See all 63 papers →

cultivation system · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

116 papers: 71 positive, 45 negative or no effect

70 papers in the same direction as this paper · 44 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

112 papers more in this group

See all 116 papers →

ipm · yield · Glycine max (soybean)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 →

cultivation system · yield · Cajanus cajan (pigeon pea)Results agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

ipm · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

39 papers: 39 positive, 0 negative or no effect

38 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 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.