Paper · 2023 · International Journal of Environment and Climate Change

Effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on Yield Attributing Parameters of Kharif Onion (Allium cepa L.)

Ashutosh Upadhyay; Ram Batuk Singh; Pranjal Singh; et al.

3
claims
7
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Aim: The objective of the research was to study the effect of Integrated Nutrient Management on the yield attributing parameters of kharif onion. Study Design: The field experiment was carried out in Randomised Block Design (RBD). Place and Duration of Study: The experiment was conducted at the Research Farm of the Department of Vegetable Science, Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture & Technology, Kanpur U.P during the kharif seasons of 2021-22 and 2022-23. Methodology: An experiment was carried out during Kharif season in the years, of 2021-22 and 2022-23 both the year same time at Vegetable Research Farm, Department of Vegetable Science, Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kalyanpur, Kanpur. The experiment was laid out in randomized block design with three replications. The treatments consisted of T1- Control: T2- 100% RDF (NPK @ 120:60:80 kg/ha; T3- 75% RDF+ FYM 6 t/ha: T4- 75%RDF+ Vermicompost@2 t/ ha; T5- 75%RDF+FYM @ 3t/ha+vermicompost@1 t/ha ;T6- 75% RDF + FYM @ 3 t/ha + Vermicompost @ 1t/ha+ Biofertilizer (Azotobacter + PSB @ 5 kg/ha each):T7‑ 50% RDF + FYM @ 12t/ha; T8-50% RDF + Vermicompost @ 4t/ha: T9- 50%RDF+ FYM @ 6t/ha + Vermicompos @ 2t/ha: T10- 50%RDF + FYM @ 6t/ha + Vermicompost @ 2t/ha + Biofertilizer (Azotobacter + PSB @ 5 kg/ha each). Results: Results revealed that the treatment T10 (50% RDF +FYM @ 6 t/ha + Vermicompost @ 2t/ha+ Biofertilizer (Azotobacter + PSB @ 5kg/ha each) performed better with respect to yield attributing parameters characters such as Average bulb weight, A, B, C grade bulb percentage, days takes to harvesting, bolting percentage of bulb and double bulb Percentage. Conclusion: The study underscores the crucial need to shift towards Integrated Nutrient Management (INM), incorporating both organic and inorganic fertilizers. This transition is essential to protect soil fertility, maintain ecosystem health, and ensure sustainable food production for future generations.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T10 performed better for average bulb weight and A, B, C grade bulb percentage.

Taxon
Allium cepa L.Allium cepat0
Treatment
T10 (50% RDF +FYM @ 6 t/ha + Vermicompost @ 2t/ha+ Biofertilizer (Azotobacter + PSB @ 5kg/ha each)e0
Outcome
Average bulb weight, A, B, C grade bulb percentagee0
Direction
performed bettere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Onion (Allium cepa L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–105 · show in text ↑
e0

“treatment T10 (50% RDF +FYM @ 6 t/ha + Vermicompost @ 2t/ha+ Biofertilizer (Azotobacter + PSB @ 5kg/ha each) performed better with respect to yield attributing parameters characters such as Average bulb weight, A, B, C grade bulb percentage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1347–1587 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

T10 performed better for days to harvesting, bolting percentage and double bulb percentage.

Taxon
Allium cepa L.Allium cepat0
Treatment
treatment T10 (50% RDF +FYM @ 6 t/ha + Vermicompost @ 2t/ha+ Biofertilizer (Azotobacter + PSB @ 5kg/ha each)e1
Outcome
days takes to harvesting, bolting percentage of bulb and double bulb Percentagee0
Direction
performed bettere0

Not reportedComparator

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Onion (Allium cepa L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–105 · show in text ↑
e0

“performed better with respect to yield attributing parameters characters such as Average bulb weight, A, B, C grade bulb percentage, days takes to harvesting, bolting percentage of bulb and double bulb Percentage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1456–1668 · show in text ↑
e1

“treatment T10 (50% RDF +FYM @ 6 t/ha + Vermicompost @ 2t/ha+ Biofertilizer (Azotobacter + PSB @ 5kg/ha each)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1347–1455 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors advocate integrated organic and inorganic nutrient management for sustainable food production.

Taxon
Allium cepa L.Allium cepat0
Outcome
shift towards Integrated Nutrient Management (INM)e0

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

Allium cepa
Allium cepa · TaxonMehdi · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Onion (Allium cepa L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 83–105 · show in text ↑
e0

“shift towards Integrated Nutrient Management (INM), incorporating both organic and inorganic fertilizers. This transition is essential to protect soil fertility, maintain ecosystem health, and ensure sustainable food production for future generations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1724–1974 · show in text ↑

Azotobacter · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 20 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

fertilization · phenology · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 12 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

inoculation · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

93 papers: 82 positive, 11 negative or no effect

81 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

89 papers more in this group

See all 93 papers →

fertilization · yield · Allium cepa (onion)Positive and negative results

530 papers: 464 positive, 66 negative or no effect

463 papers in the same direction as this paper · 59 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

526 papers more in this group

See all 530 papers →

inoculation · phenology · Allium cepa (onion)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.