Abstract
The field experiment was conducted during Rabi season of 2014-2015 at the central research farm of Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture Technology and Sciences, Deemed-to-be-University, Allahabad. Evaluated the efficacy of different doses of Beauveria bassiana and NSKE against Diamond Back Moth (Plutella xylostella). Observed that the maximum reduction per cent of Beauveria bassiana 6% (57.79%) as compared to treated (cypermethrin 25 EC) and untreated control (60.85% and 0.00% respectively). The maximum yield and cost benefit ratio was recorded in Beauveria bassiana 6% (234.87 q/ha and 1:6.42) as compared to treated and untreated control (258.36 q/ha, 1:6.67 and 98.46 q/ha 1:2.78 respectively).
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 3
Claim · model-written summary
Beauveria bassiana 6% produced 57.79% maximum reduction of diamondback moth, versus 60.85% for cypermethrin and 0.00% untreated.
- Taxon
- cabbage
Brassica oleracea var. capitatat0 - Treatment
- Beauveria bassiana 6%e0
- Interactor
- diamondback moth
Plutella xylostellat0pest - Second interactor
- Beauveria bassiana
Beauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- reduction per cente0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 57.79%e0
- Qualifier
- 60.85% and 0.00%e0
- Comparator
- treated (cypermethrin 25 EC) and untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maximum reduction per cent of Beauveria bassiana 6% (57.79%) as compared to treated (cypermethrin 25 EC) and untreated control (60.85% and 0.00% respectively)”
t0“diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella L.) on cabbage (Brassica oleracea L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cabbage yield with Beauveria bassiana 6% was 234.87 q/ha, versus 258.36 q/ha with cypermethrin and 98.46 q/ha untreated.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatat0
- Treatment
- Beauveria bassiana 6%e0
- Interactor
- Beauveria bassianaBeauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 234.87 q/hae0
- Qualifier
- 258.36 q/ha, 1:6.67 and 98.46 q/ha 1:2.78e0
- Comparator
- treated and untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The maximum yield and cost benefit ratio was recorded in Beauveria bassiana 6% (234.87 q/ha and 1:6.42) as compared to treated and untreated control (258.36 q/ha, 1:6.67 and 98.46 q/ha 1:2.78 respectively)”
t0“on cabbage (Brassica oleracea L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The cost benefit ratio for Beauveria bassiana 6% was 1:6.42, versus 1:6.67 for cypermethrin and 1:2.78 untreated.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatat0
- Treatment
- Beauveria bassiana 6%e0
- Interactor
- Beauveria bassianaBeauveria bassianae0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- cost benefit ratioe0
- Direction
- maximume0
- Value
- 1:6.42e0
- Qualifier
- 1:6.67 and 98.46 q/ha 1:2.78e0
- Comparator
- treated and untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The maximum yield and cost benefit ratio was recorded in Beauveria bassiana 6% (234.87 q/ha and 1:6.42) as compared to treated and untreated control (258.36 q/ha, 1:6.67 and 98.46 q/ha 1:2.78 respectively)”
t0“on cabbage (Brassica oleracea L.)”
The same questions in other papers
Beauveria bassiana · Plutella xylostella · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →Beauveria bassiana · yield · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.