Abstract
The field investigation was conducted at College Farm, Navsari Agricultural University, Navsari, to assess the impact of land configuration on summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.) under South Gujarat conditions during the summer seasons of 2022 and 2023. The experiment utilized a split plot design with 24 treatment combinations, comprising four irrigation levels: irrigation at 30 and 45 DAS (I1), irrigation at 30, 45, and 60 DAS (I2), irrigation at 30 and 60 DAS (I3), and irrigation at 45 and 60 DAS (I4) as main plots. Two bio compost treatments were included in sub plots: without bio compost (B0) and with bio compost at 5 t/ha (B1), replicated four times. The experimental soil was clayey, low in organic carbon and available nitrogen, medium in available P2O5, and high in available K2O, with a slightly alkaline pH and normal electrical conductivity. Results from both years indicated that the highest irrigation level (I2) significantly improved plant height at 60 DAS and harvest, increased the number of branches and root nodules per plant at 40 and 60 DAS, and enhanced dry matter accumulation and crop growth rate compared to I4. However, treatments I2 required more days to reach 50% flowering and maturity. Furthermore, I2 also resulted in a higher number of pods per plant, greater grain weight per plant, and increased grain and stover yields. In terms of nutritional content, I2 showed the maximum protein content, protein yield, and higher N, P, and K levels in the grain compared to I4. Notably, irrigation levels did not significantly affect initial or harvest plant population, pod length, 100-grain weight, grains per pod, harvest index, soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon content, or nutrient status post-harvest. The highest field water use efficiency was observed with two irrigations (I1), as opposed to the three irrigations in I2. Overall, the highest consumptive water use and significant improvement in N, P, and K uptake were recorded under the I2 treatment.
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation at 30, 45 and 60 DAS (I2) significantly improved plant height at 60 DAS and at harvest compared with I4.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)
.jpg?width=60)
Vigna radiatat0 - Treatment
- highest irrigation level (I2)e1
- Outcome
- plant height at 60 DAS and harveste1
- Direction
- improvede1
- Comparator
- I4e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e1“Results from both years indicated that the highest irrigation level (I2) significantly improved plant height at 60 DAS and harvest, increased the number of branches and root nodules per plant at 40 and 60 DAS, and enhanced dry matter accumulation and crop growth rate compared to I4”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 increased the number of branches and root nodules per plant at 40 and 60 DAS compared with I4.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- highest irrigation level (I2)e1
- Outcome
- number of branches and root nodules per plante1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- I4e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e1“Results from both years indicated that the highest irrigation level (I2) significantly improved plant height at 60 DAS and harvest, increased the number of branches and root nodules per plant at 40 and 60 DAS, and enhanced dry matter accumulation and crop growth rate compared to I4”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 enhanced dry matter accumulation and crop growth rate compared with I4.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- highest irrigation level (I2)e1
- Outcome
- dry matter accumulation and crop growth ratee1
- Direction
- enhancede1
- Comparator
- I4e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e1“Results from both years indicated that the highest irrigation level (I2) significantly improved plant height at 60 DAS and harvest, increased the number of branches and root nodules per plant at 40 and 60 DAS, and enhanced dry matter accumulation and crop growth rate compared to I4”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 required more days to reach 50% flowering and maturity.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e2
- Outcome
- days to reach 50% flowering and maturitye2
- Direction
- more dayse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e2“However, treatments I2 required more days to reach 50% flowering and maturity”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 resulted in a higher number of pods per plant.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e3
- Outcome
- number of pods per plante3
- Direction
- highere3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e3“Furthermore, I2 also resulted in a higher number of pods per plant, greater grain weight per plant, and increased grain and stover yields”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 gave greater grain weight per plant.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e3
- Outcome
- grain weight per plante3
- Direction
- greatere3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e3“Furthermore, I2 also resulted in a higher number of pods per plant, greater grain weight per plant, and increased grain and stover yields”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 increased grain and stover yields.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e3
- Outcome
- grain and stover yieldse3
- Direction
- increasede3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e3“Furthermore, I2 also resulted in a higher number of pods per plant, greater grain weight per plant, and increased grain and stover yields”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 showed the maximum protein content in the grain compared with I4.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e4
- Outcome
- protein contente4
- Direction
- maximume4
- Comparator
- I4e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e4“In terms of nutritional content, I2 showed the maximum protein content, protein yield, and higher N, P, and K levels in the grain compared to I4”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 showed the maximum protein yield compared with I4.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e4
- Outcome
- protein yielde4
- Direction
- maximume4
- Comparator
- I4e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e4“In terms of nutritional content, I2 showed the maximum protein content, protein yield, and higher N, P, and K levels in the grain compared to I4”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 showed higher N, P and K levels in the grain compared with I4.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e4
- Outcome
- N, P, and K levelse4
- Direction
- highere4
- Comparator
- I4e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e4“In terms of nutritional content, I2 showed the maximum protein content, protein yield, and higher N, P, and K levels in the grain compared to I4”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation levels did not significantly affect initial or harvest plant population.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- irrigation levelse5
- Outcome
- initial or harvest plant populatione5
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e5“Notably, irrigation levels did not significantly affect initial or harvest plant population, pod length, 100-grain weight, grains per pod, harvest index, soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon content, or nutrient status post-harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation levels did not significantly affect pod length, 100-grain weight or grains per pod.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- irrigation levelse5
- Outcome
- pod length, 100-grain weight, grains per pode5
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e5“Notably, irrigation levels did not significantly affect initial or harvest plant population, pod length, 100-grain weight, grains per pod, harvest index, soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon content, or nutrient status post-harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation levels did not significantly affect harvest index.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- irrigation levelse5
- Outcome
- harvest indexe5
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e5“Notably, irrigation levels did not significantly affect initial or harvest plant population, pod length, 100-grain weight, grains per pod, harvest index, soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon content, or nutrient status post-harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation levels did not significantly affect soil pH, electrical conductivity or organic carbon content.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- irrigation levelse5
- Outcome
- soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon contente5
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e5“Notably, irrigation levels did not significantly affect initial or harvest plant population, pod length, 100-grain weight, grains per pod, harvest index, soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon content, or nutrient status post-harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation levels did not significantly affect nutrient status post-harvest.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- irrigation levelse5
- Outcome
- nutrient status post-harveste5
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e5“Notably, irrigation levels did not significantly affect initial or harvest plant population, pod length, 100-grain weight, grains per pod, harvest index, soil pH, electrical conductivity, organic carbon content, or nutrient status post-harvest”
Claim · model-written summary
The two-irrigation treatment (I1) had the highest field water use efficiency, compared with the three-irrigation treatment I2.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- two irrigations (I1)e6
- Outcome
- field water use efficiencye6
- Direction
- higheste6
- Comparator
- three irrigations in I2e6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e6“The highest field water use efficiency was observed with two irrigations (I1), as opposed to the three irrigations in I2”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 had the highest consumptive water use.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e7
- Outcome
- consumptive water usee7
- Direction
- higheste7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e7“Overall, the highest consumptive water use and significant improvement in N, P, and K uptake were recorded under the I2 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
I2 significantly improved N, P and K uptake.
- Taxon
- green gram (Vigna radiata L.)Vigna radiatat0
- Treatment
- I2e7
- Outcome
- N, P, and K uptakee7
- Direction
- significant improvemente7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“summer green gram (Vigna radiata L.)”
e7“Overall, the highest consumptive water use and significant improvement in N, P, and K uptake were recorded under the I2 treatment”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · pest · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
irrigation · soil: chemistry · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
irrigation · nutrient: content · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
irrigation · physiology: water · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →irrigation · yield · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Positive and negative results
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
71 papers more in this group
See all 75 papers →irrigation · symbiosis · Vigna radiata (mung bean)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.