You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Evaluation of Fertilizer Potential of Different K Compounds Prepared Utilizing Sea Bittern as Feed Stock
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, September 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2017.01541 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Khanjan Trivedi, Denish Kubavat, Krishna K. Ghara, Ranjeet Kumar, Hardik Trivedi, K. G. Vijay Anand, Pratyush Maiti, Arup Ghosh |
| Abstract |
Aim: Many countries import potassic fertilizers due to dearth of K-mineral deposits. Therefore processes to obtain K-nutrient sources from sea bittern were developed by our Institute. The present investigation evaluated the fertilizer potential of three different sea bittern-derived (SBD) potassium forms developed viz., potassium schoenite, potassium nitrate and potassium ammonium sulfate on maize productivity in two cropping seasons. Methods: The pot and field experiments consisted of four treatments, wherein the three K forms were applied at the recommended rate of 40 kg K2O ha(-1) and were compared with commercially used sulfate of potash. The effect of these fertilizers on different parameters of plant and soil were evaluated. Results: The application of SBD-potassic fertilizers led to enhancement in growth, productivity and quality of maize which related well with higher photosynthesis, nutrient uptake and soil quality parameters. On an average all the three forms of sea bittern-derived potash enhanced yield of maize over control by 22.3 and 23.8%, respectively, in pot and field trials. The best performance was under SBD-KNO3, which also recorded the highest benefit: cost ratio of 1.76. Conclusion: The K-fertilizers derived from sea-bittern-a waste product of salt industry-can thus be economically used to improve crop production sustainably. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 27% |
| Researcher | 6 | 20% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 8 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 30% |
| Engineering | 3 | 10% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 7% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 13% |
| Unknown | 10 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,459,801
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#16,413
of 20,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,706
of 315,653 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#406
of 477 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,529 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,653 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 477 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.