Effect of Some Micronutrients on Damage Compensation and Yield Parameters in Okra.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of micronutrients on damage compensation and yield components of okra was investigated, using three foliar sprays (at 15 days interval) of Effective microorganisms (EM-1), Wokozim and Kissan Supreme Tonic (KST). Weekly observations on sucking complex (thrips, jassid, whitefly) and pod borers were carried out. The yield ha-1 of green pods was recorded to ascertain the compensation of the damage done by the insect pests. The damage done by sucking complex and borers was markedly compensated by the micronutrients, and okra pod yield in EM-1, Wokozim and KST sprayed plots were 10911, 9507 and 8948 kg ha-1, respectively as compared to 8034 kg ha-1 in control. The effect of micronutrients on crop growth and subsequently on sucking complex infestation was significant and thrips, jassid, whitefly and borer infestation was relatively lesser in plots sprayed with micronutrient as compared to the control. KST was most effective in damage compensation of sucking complex and borers with highest okra green pod yield (P
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) | 0.000 | 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".