Abstract
A field experiment was conducted during the Kharif-2022 season at the Agronomy Research Field, FOA, SKUAST-Kashmir, to investigate the efficacy of nano-urea in improving nitrogen-use efficiency in irrigated maize. Ten treatments were evaluated viz., T1: Control, T2: Recommended dose of Nitrogen (RDN) as basal (prilled urea), T3: 75% RDN + 1 spray nano-urea at 2 ml L-1 (60 DAS), T4: 75% RDN + 1 spray at 4 ml L-1 (60 DAS), T5: 50% RDN + 2 sprays at 2 ml L-1 (30 and 60 DAS), T6: 50% RDN + 2 sprays at 4 ml L-1 (30 and 60 DAS), T7: 25% RDN + 2 sprays at 6 ml L-1 (30 and 60 DAS), T8: 25% RDN + 2 sprays at 8 ml L-1 (30 and 60 DAS), T9: 25% RDN + 1 spray at 6 ml L-1 (60 DAS), T10: 25% RDN + 1 spray at 8 ml L-1 (60 DAS). The experiment was carried out following a randomized complete block design with three replications. Results revealed that treatment T6 (50% RDN as basal + 2 sprays at 30 and 60 DAS at 4 ml L-1 of nano-urea) exhibited superior performance compared to the recommended nitrogen dose (T2) and other treatments in enhancing nutri-ent-use efficiency. Notably, treatment T6 demonstrated the highest nitrogen uptake in grain (101.92 kg ha-1) as well as stover (67.41 kg ha-1), surpassing all other treatments. Additionally, agronomic efficiency was significantly higher in T8, while physiological efficiency peaked in T6. Yield attributes and overall yield showed consistent improvements in treatments receiving nano-urea. Furthermore, treatments utilizing nano-urea demonstrated higher net returns and benefit-cost ratios, with T6 particularly standing out. These findings underscore the potential of foliar application of nano-urea to halve the recommended dose of prilled urea, thereby enhancing nitrogen uptake, nutrient-use efficiency, yield, and economic returns, while promoting sustainability in agriculture.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
T6 performed best for nutrient use efficiency compared with T2 and other treatments.
- Treatment
- T6 (50% RDN as basal + 2 sprays at 30 and 60 DAS at 4 ml L-1 of nano-urea)e0
- Outcome
- nutri-ent-use efficiencye0
- Direction
- superiore0
- Comparator
- recommended nitrogen dose (T2) and other treatmentse0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment T6 (50% RDN as basal + 2 sprays at 30 and 60 DAS at 4 ml L-1 of nano-urea) exhibited superior performance compared to the recommended nitrogen dose (T2) and other treatments in enhancing nutri-ent-use efficiency.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
T6 had the highest grain nitrogen uptake, 101.92 kg ha-1.
- Treatment
- T6e0
- Outcome
- nitrogen uptake in graine0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 101.92 kg ha-1e0
- Comparator
- all other treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment T6 demonstrated the highest nitrogen uptake in grain (101.92 kg ha-1) as well as stover (67.41 kg ha-1), surpassing all other treatments.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
T6 had the highest stover nitrogen uptake, 67.41 kg ha-1.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatment T6 demonstrated the highest nitrogen uptake in grain (101.92 kg ha-1) as well as stover (67.41 kg ha-1), surpassing all other treatments.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Agronomic efficiency was significantly higher under T8.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“agronomic efficiency was significantly higher in T8, while physiological efficiency peaked in T6.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Physiological efficiency peaked under T6.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“agronomic efficiency was significantly higher in T8, while physiological efficiency peaked in T6.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Nano urea treatments improved yield attributes and overall yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield attributes and overall yield showed consistent improvements in treatments receiving nano-urea.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Nano urea treatments produced higher net returns and benefit-cost ratios, particularly T6.
- Treatment
- nano-ureae0
- Outcome
- net returns and benefit-cost ratiose0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- T6 particularly standing oute0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatments utilizing nano-urea demonstrated higher net returns and benefit-cost ratios, with T6 particularly standing out.”
t0“Maize”
The same questions in other papers
nanoparticle · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
214 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
229 papers more in this group
See all 233 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.