Abstract
An experiment was conducted on “Studies on the effect of pruning and nutrition on growth, yield, and quality of fig (Ficus carica L.)” fig orchard located at the College of Agriculture, Badnapur, during the year 2021-2022. The field experiment was laid out in Factorial Randomized Block Design (FRBD) replicated thrice with twelve treatments, where factor ‘A’ is heading back of 30 cm central leader, heading back of 30 cm side branches and pruning with alternate limbs and control and factor ‘B’ is soil application of N: P2O5: K2O at different levels. The pruning was done in 11th October of 2021. Observations were made on physiological, flowering, and quality traits. The results of the investigation revealed that the morphological, physiological, and quality characters were significantly influenced by different pruning levels and fertilizer treatments. Among the different treatments, T6 (Heading back of 30cm side branches with soil application of N: P2O5: K2O @ 900: 250:275g/plant) influence the yield characters viz., number of fruits per tree, number of spur or flowers per plant and, yield of fruit per tree, yield of fruit per hectare. The quality characters like total soluble solids, ascorbic acid content, reducing sugars, non-reducing sugars and weight of pulp were higher in T6 (Heading back of 30 cm side branches with Soil application of N: P2O5:K2O @ 900: 250: 275g/plant). In conclusion of this study, it was inferred that T6 (Heading back of 30cm side branches with Soil application of N: P2O5: K2O @ 900: 250:275g/plant).
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Pruning and fertilization significantly influenced fig morphology, physiology and quality.
- Taxon
- figt0
- Treatment
- different pruning levels and fertilizer treatmentse0
- Outcome
- morphological, physiological, and quality characterse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“the morphological, physiological, and quality characters were significantly influenced by different pruning levels and fertilizer treatments”
t0“Fig”
Claim · model-written summary
T6 influenced fig fruit number, flowers and yields.
- Taxon
- figt0
- Treatment
- Heading back of 30cm side branches with soil application of N: P2O5: K2O @ 900: 250:275g/plante0
- Outcome
- number of fruits per tree, number of spur or flowers per plant and, yield of fruit per tree, yield of fruit per hectaree0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“T6 (Heading back of 30cm side branches with soil application of N: P2O5: K2O @ 900: 250:275g/plant) influence the yield characters viz., number of fruits per tree, number of spur or flowers per plant and, yield of fruit per tree, yield of fruit per hectare”
t0“Fig”
Claim · model-written summary
T6 gave higher soluble solids, ascorbic acid and reducing sugars.
- Taxon
- figt0
- Treatment
- T6e0
- Outcome
- total soluble solids, ascorbic acid content, reducing sugarse0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The quality characters like total soluble solids, ascorbic acid content, reducing sugars, non-reducing sugars and weight of pulp were higher in T6 (Heading back of 30 cm side branches with Soil application of N: P2O5:K2O @ 900: 250: 275g/plant)”
t0“Fig”
Claim · model-written summary
T6 gave higher non-reducing sugars and pulp weight.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The quality characters like total soluble solids, ascorbic acid content, reducing sugars, non-reducing sugars and weight of pulp were higher in T6 (Heading back of 30 cm side branches with Soil application of N: P2O5:K2O @ 900: 250: 275g/plant)”
t0“Fig”
The same questions in other papers
phosphorus · yield · Ficus carica (common fig)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
potassium · yield · Ficus carica (common fig)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.