Paper · 2022 · Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry

Effect of foliar application of humic acid on yield parameters and quality of chilli

Thouti Pavani; PW Deshmukh; Oguboyana Srikanth Yadav

4
claims
10
verbatim quotes
7
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

An experiment was carried out to study the “Effect of foliar application of humic acid on yield parameters and quality of chilli” during kharif 2020-21 at Research Farm, Chili and Vegetable Research Unit, Dr. PDKV, Akola. The experiment had eight treatments replicated thrice in Randomized block design. The treatments included: T1 -Absolute control, T2 - 100% RDF (100:50:50 kg N, P2O5 and K2O ha-1), T3, T4 & T5 -100% RDF +3 spray of HA @ 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5% respectively, T6, T7 & T8 -100% RDF +6 spray of HA @ 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5% respectively. Among all the treatments T8 (100% RDF + 6 spray humic acid @ 1.5%) treatment was found most effective treatment and recorded significantly maximum yield parameters and chlorophyll content of chilli. However, ascorbic acid content, capsaicin content, soil available nutrients and micro nutrients showed no significant change in response to humic acid treatment.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The 100% RDF plus six sprays of humic acid at 1.5% treatment recorded significantly maximum yield parameters of chilli among all treatments.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
100% RDF + 6 spray humic acid @ 1.5%e1
Outcome
yield parameterse1
Direction
maximume1
Comparator
all the treatmentse1

Verbatim

t0

“quality of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–84 · show in text ↑
e1

“Among all the treatments T8 (100% RDF + 6 spray humic acid @ 1.5%) treatment was found most effective treatment and recorded significantly maximum yield parameters and chlorophyll content of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–741 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The 100% RDF plus six sprays of humic acid at 1.5% treatment recorded significantly maximum chlorophyll content of chilli among all treatments.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
100% RDF + 6 spray humic acid @ 1.5%e1
Outcome
chlorophyll contente1
Direction
maximume1
Comparator
all the treatmentse1

Verbatim

t0

“quality of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–84 · show in text ↑
e1

“Among all the treatments T8 (100% RDF + 6 spray humic acid @ 1.5%) treatment was found most effective treatment and recorded significantly maximum yield parameters and chlorophyll content of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–741 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic acid treatment did not change significantly the ascorbic acid content and capsaicin content of chilli.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
humic acid treatmente3
Outcome
ascorbic acid content, capsaicin contente3
Direction
no significant changee3
Comparator
Absolute controle2

Verbatim

t0

“quality of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–84 · show in text ↑
e2

“T1 -Absolute control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–349 · show in text ↑
e3

“ascorbic acid content, capsaicin content, soil available nutrients and micro nutrients showed no significant change in response to humic acid treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 752–903 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic acid treatment did not change significantly the soil available nutrients and micro nutrients.

Taxon
chillit0
Treatment
humic acid treatmente3
Outcome
soil available nutrients and micro nutrientse3
Direction
no significant changee3
Comparator
Absolute controle2

Verbatim

t0

“quality of chilli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–84 · show in text ↑
e2

“T1 -Absolute control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 329–349 · show in text ↑
e3

“ascorbic acid content, capsaicin content, soil available nutrients and micro nutrients showed no significant change in response to humic acid treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 752–903 · show in text ↑

fertilization · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Results differ

163 papers: 152 positive, 11 negative or no effect

151 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

159 papers more in this group

See all 163 papers →

other · quality: phytochemicals · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

other · nutrient: content · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 9 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

fertilization · physiology: pigments · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 16 positive, 1 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

other · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 16 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

application · yield · Capsicum (peppers)Positive and negative results

74 papers: 73 positive, 1 negative or no effect

72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. positive

70 papers more in this group

See all 74 papers →

other · physiology: pigments · Capsicum (peppers)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 →

application · physiology: pigments · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 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.