Abstract
Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field. Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population. The leafhoppers population was low (1.5 number / 3 leaves) in the demo plots and it was high (4.2 numbers/ 3 leaves) in the check plots. Similarly the aphids, thrips, whitefly and mealy bug population were low in the demo plots when compared to the check plots. The predator population viz., coccinellids, syrphids, green lace wing and spiders was high in the demo plots compared to very meager in the check plots. It indicated the harmful effect of pesticides on natural enemies. The number of pesticide spray was reduced completely in the demo plots but in the check plots the farmers sprayed five to six rounds chemical insecticides. The net return and benefit cost ratio was Rs.89,603/ha and 1:2.2 respectively in demo plot and it was only Rs.23,763/ha 1: 1.2 respectively in check plot.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
The eco-friendly IPM module significantly reduced the sucking pest population in cotton compared with check plots.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume1 - Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Interactor
- sucking pestse0pest
- Outcome
- sucking pests populatione0
- Direction
- significantly reducede0
- Comparator
- check plotse2
- Setting
- farmer’s fielde1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e2“The leafhoppers population was low (1.5 number / 3 leaves) in the demo plots and it was high (4.2 numbers/ 3 leaves) in the check plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Leafhopper population was low in the IPM demonstration plots (1.5 per 3 leaves) against 4.2 in check plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Interactor
- leafhoppersCicadellidaee2pest
- Outcome
- leafhoppers populatione2
- Direction
- lowe2
- Value
- 1.5 number / 3 leavese2
- Qualifier
- 4.2 numbers/ 3 leavese2
- Comparator
- check plotse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e2“The leafhoppers population was low (1.5 number / 3 leaves) in the demo plots and it was high (4.2 numbers/ 3 leaves) in the check plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Aphids, thrips and whitefly populations were low in IPM demonstration plots compared with check plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Interactor
- aphidsAphidomorphae3pest
- Outcome
- aphids, thrips, whiteflye3
- Direction
- were lowe3
- Qualifier
- whiteflye3
- Comparator
- check plotse3
ThripsOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e3“Similarly the aphids, thrips, whitefly and mealy bug population were low in the demo plots when compared to the check plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Mealy bug population was low in IPM demonstration plots compared with check plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Interactor
- mealy buge3pest
- Outcome
- mealy bug populatione3
- Direction
- were lowe3
- Comparator
- check plotse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e3“Similarly the aphids, thrips, whitefly and mealy bug population were low in the demo plots when compared to the check plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Predator population, including coccinellids and syrphids, was high in IPM demonstration plots compared with check plots.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Interactor
- coccinellidse4biocontrol_agent
- Second interactor
- syrphidse4biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- predator populatione4
- Direction
- highe4
- Qualifier
- green lace wing and spiderse4
- Comparator
- check plotse4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e4“The predator population viz., coccinellids, syrphids, green lace wing and spiders was high in the demo plots compared to very meager in the check plots”
Claim · model-written summary
The number of pesticide sprays was reduced completely in IPM demonstration plots; check plots received five to six chemical insecticide rounds.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Outcome
- number of pesticide spraye5
- Direction
- reduced completelye5
- Qualifier
- five to six rounds chemical insecticidese5
- Comparator
- check plotse5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e5“The number of pesticide spray was reduced completely in the demo plots but in the check plots the farmers sprayed five to six rounds chemical insecticides”
Claim · model-written summary
Net return was higher in the IPM demonstration plot (Rs.89,603/ha) than in the check plot (Rs.23,763/ha).
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Outcome
- net returne6
- Direction
- higherinferrede6
- Value
- Rs.89,603/hae6
- Qualifier
- Rs.23,763/hae6
- Comparator
- check plote6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e6“The net return and benefit cost ratio was Rs.89,603/ha and 1:2.2 respectively in demo plot and it was only Rs.23,763/ha 1: 1.2 respectively in check plot”
Claim · model-written summary
Benefit cost ratio was higher in the IPM demonstration plot (1:2.2) than in the check plot (1:1.2).
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume1
- Treatment
- Eco-friendly IPM modulee0
- Outcome
- benefit cost ratioe6
- Direction
- higherinferrede6
- Value
- 1:2.2e6
- Qualifier
- 1: 1.2e6
- Comparator
- check plote6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Eco-friendly IPM module has significantly reduced the sucking pests population”
e1“Eco-friendly IPM module for the management of major sucking pests of cotton was demonstrated in the farmer’s field”
e6“The net return and benefit cost ratio was Rs.89,603/ha and 1:2.2 respectively in demo plot and it was only Rs.23,763/ha 1: 1.2 respectively in check plot”
The same questions in other papers
ipm · Aphidomorpha · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →ipm · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
7 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →ipm · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
22 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →ipm · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
38 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- 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.