Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at the Farm of Regional Centre, Sugarcane Breeding Institute, Karnal, dur- ing 1998-99 and 1999-2000, to find out the feasibility of growing sugarcane at row spacing of 150 cm required for mechanical harvesting by austoft harvester. Planting of 172,144 budstha in paired rows of 40 : 110 cm, con- ventional row spacing of 75 cm with setts placed along the rows and wide row spacing of 150 cm with setts placed across the rows (at equal seed rates in all the cases) gave at par cane yieldtha. Intercropping of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori & Paol.), Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. & Cosson], coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) and onion (Allium cepa L.) reduced the cane yield by 17.2, 7.5, 6.9 and 2.0%, respec- tively, than sole sugarcane, but the significant reduction was recorded with wheat only. Maximum net monetary return of Rs 108,470tha was obtained from onion + sugarcane system, with higher benefit : cost ratio of 2.90. Based on cane-equivalent yieldtha, closer row spacing of 75 cm with setts placed along the rows recorded com- parable cane yield to row spacing of 150 cm coupled with setts placed across the rows (2 budded setts) with on- ion as an intercrop in both the cases. Thus, mechanical harvesting with aust~ft harvester is feasible by planting sugarcane at 150 cm spacing by adopting seed rate of 172,144 budstha with onion as an intercrop without any economic loss to the growers.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping with wheat reduced sugarcane yield by 17.2% relative to sole sugarcane, a significant reduction.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e4“Intercropping of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori & Paol.), Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. & Cosson], coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) and onion (Allium cepa L.) reduced the cane yield by 17.2, 7.5, 6.9 and 2.0%, respec- tively, than sole sugarcane”
e5“but the significant reduction was recorded with wheat only”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping with Indian mustard reduced sugarcane yield by 7.5% relative to sole sugarcane.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e4“Intercropping of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori & Paol.), Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. & Cosson], coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) and onion (Allium cepa L.) reduced the cane yield by 17.2, 7.5, 6.9 and 2.0%, respec- tively, than sole sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping with coriander reduced sugarcane yield by 6.9% relative to sole sugarcane.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e4“Intercropping of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori & Paol.), Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. & Cosson], coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) and onion (Allium cepa L.) reduced the cane yield by 17.2, 7.5, 6.9 and 2.0%, respec- tively, than sole sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Intercropping with onion reduced sugarcane yield by 2.0% relative to sole sugarcane.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e4“Intercropping of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. emend. Fiori & Paol.), Indian mustard [Brassica juncea (L.) Czernj. & Cosson], coriander (Coriandrum sativum L.) and onion (Allium cepa L.) reduced the cane yield by 17.2, 7.5, 6.9 and 2.0%, respec- tively, than sole sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
The onion and sugarcane system gave the maximum net monetary return.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e6“Maximum net monetary return of Rs 108,470tha was obtained from onion + sugarcane system, with higher benefit : cost ratio of 2.90”
Claim · model-written summary
The onion and sugarcane system had a higher benefit to cost ratio, 2.90.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e6“Maximum net monetary return of Rs 108,470tha was obtained from onion + sugarcane system, with higher benefit : cost ratio of 2.90”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugarcane planted at 75 cm with setts along the rows gave cane yield comparable to 150 cm row spacing when onion was intercropped.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e7“closer row spacing of 75 cm with setts placed along the rows recorded com- parable cane yield to row spacing of 150 cm”
Claim · model-written summary
Mechanical harvesting with an austoft harvester is feasible for sugarcane planted at 150 cm spacing with onion as an intercrop.
Verbatim
t0“mechanical harvesting of sugarcane”
e1“mechanical harvesting with aust~ft harvester is feasible by planting sugarcane at 150 cm spacing”
The same questions in other papers
Brassica juncea · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
Coriandrum sativum · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →Triticum aestivum · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →Allium cepa · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →intercropping · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results differ
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 67 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
84 papers more in this group
See all 88 papers →density · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 38 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 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.