Nursery Soil Amendments for Cashew Seedling Production: A Comparative Analysis of Coffee Husk and NPK
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amendment of nursery soil with nutrient-containing compounds could promote seedling development. The utility of coffee husk and the optimum quantity needed in sole or combination with NPK for enhanced cashew seedling development was investigated. Medium size cashew nuts were raised for 20 weeks in six nutritional treatments. There were three coffee husk application rates (0.0021 g-1Kg, 0.0041 g-1Kg and 0.0062 g-1Kg), CH and NPK (0.00208 g-1Kg CH and 0.00016 g-1Kg NPK), 0.00016 g-1Kg NPK and a control in 3 Kg of soil. Leaf count (LC), stem girth (SG), plant height (PH) and leaf area (LA) were measured five times. Amended nursery soil significantly (P < 0.05) and positively affected the performance of cashew seedling. Potted nursery soil amended with higher (? 0.0041 g-1Kg) CH concentration and CH/NPK significantly (P < 0.05) increased LC, SG, PH and LA at every periodic intervals of measurement. The five sequential intervals of measuring LC, LA, SG and PH showed different trend patterns: linear, quadratic and cubic with respect to each treatment. Post-experiment soil and plant nutritional test revealed that the N, P, K, Ca, Mg, soil pH, soil organic carbon (SOC), and soil organic matter (SOM) were significantly (P < 0.05) higher compared to the control. CH with 0.00625 g-1Kg concentration increased soil pH, SOC, SOM, N, K, C, Mg and leaf N by 10.20%, 10.50%, 19.20%, 8.33%, 42.38%, 25.00%, 50.00% and 93.20% respectively. Post experiment evaluation revealed that the five nutritional treatments significantly aided higher biomass. However, addition of 18.75 g coffee husk to 3 Kg of soil was most effective for improved cashew seedling growth and development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".