Paper · 2004 · Madras Agricultural Journal

Effect of crop residue management of early season legumes on the succeeding rainfed finger millet

RAMAMOORTHY K; CHRISTOPHER LOURDURAJ A; ALAGUDURAI S; et al.

2
claims
3
verbatim quotes
6
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted at the Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu during kharif and rabi seasons of 2000-2003 under rainfed condition. The treatments included raising greengram or cowpea for vegetable/grain purpose and utilization of haulms as fodder as well for incorporation alongwith fallow (no pulse crop). For the second season crop of finger millet, the above treatments were kept as main plot treatments with the subplot treatments of either transplanting or direct sowing of finger millet with and without phosphorus. Results of the study revealed that maximum green fodder production and yield were obtained in cowpea as compared to greengram. In succeeding finger millet crop, higher grain and straw yield and net return were obtained when cowpea was incorporated in the early season followed by transplanting of finger millet with P application.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cowpea gave maximum green fodder production and yield compared with greengram.

Treatment
cowpeae0
Outcome
green fodder production and yielde0
Direction
maximume0
Comparator
greengrame0

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

Vigna unguiculata
Vigna unguiculata · TaxonHeraldDesa at English Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“maximum green fodder production and yield were obtained in cowpea as compared to greengram”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 618–708 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In the succeeding finger millet crop, cowpea incorporated early and followed by transplanting with P gave higher grain and straw yield and net return.

Taxon
finger milletEleusine coracanae1
Organ / stage
grain and strawe1
Treatment
cowpea was incorporated in the early season followed by transplanting of finger millet with P applicatione1
Outcome
grain and straw yield and net returne1
Direction
highere1
Setting
rainfed conditione2

Not reportedComparator

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

Eleusine coracana
Eleusine coracana · TaxonAgnieszka Kwiecień, Nova · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“higher grain and straw yield and net return were obtained when cowpea was incorporated in the early season followed by transplanting of finger millet with P application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–912 · show in text ↑
e2

“Field experiments were conducted at the Department of Agronomy, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu during kharif and rabi seasons of 2000-2003 under rainfed condition”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–190 · show in text ↑

Vigna unguiculata · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)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 →

transplanting · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Positive and negative results

30 papers: 26 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

phosphorus · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 37 positive, 2 negative or no effect

36 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 papers →

climate site · yield · Eleusine coracana (finger millet)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 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.