Constraints faced by the potato growers about integrated pest management practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IPM is the modern concept to environmentally sound and sustainable strategy for pest management. IPM encourages the most compatible and ecologically sound combination of available pest suppression techniques, to keep pest population below economically damaging levels. Priya Karade (2014). The study was carried out during 2014–2015 in Etawah district of Uttar Pradesh regarding constraints level of IPM practices faced by paddy growers. In potato production Kannouj district is the highest producing area but in respect of average production has 8th place in Uttar Pradesh. Potato production of district Etawah is 157797 (q./ha.) and average production is 249.60(q./ha.). This is mainly due to the lack of technical know-how, inputs availability at time and skill proficiency of potato growers. It has also been observed that even in the farmers have the technical knowledge they restrict the adoption as they are unskilled in utilization of technology in the fields. Uses of insecticides/fungicides to control insects, pests and disease, for instances, farmers fear to use them if prepared solution is not adequate and causes more loss in stead of increasing production. Thus, it is not essential only to possess technical know-how rather their skillful use for optimum production is more important. Hence, it would not be out of place here to mention that the human capabilities play a vital role in achieving desired potato yields. The two districts namely, Kannauj and Etawah were selected purposively for the present investigation. Keeping these points in view, an attempt was made to find out the Constraints Faced by the Potato Growers about Integrated Pest Management Practices. The major constraints observed in adoption of IPM practices in paddy crop were lack of storage facilities for IPM material in rural area, lack of quality IPM material at government sale centers; IPM tools/modules were not easily available in rural areas and finally non availability of electricity for storage and production of IPM materials.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".