1967
DOI: 10.1007/bf02897180
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effects of row and plant spacing and time of planting on seed yield of kenaf

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1970
1970
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some research has been done to develop improved management practices for kenaf yield, but these studies were located in only a few U.S. regions. Studies have focused on management practices, such as planting time, row spacing, population density, fertilization, irrigation, or crop rotation practices in Florida (Joyner & Wilson, 1967), Nebraska (Williams, 1966), California (Bhangoo, Tehrani, & Henderson, 1986), Mississippi (Baldwin & Graham, 2006), Maryland (Campbell & White, 1982; Massey, 1974), New Mexico (Lauriault & Puppala, 2009), and North Carolina (Jordan et al., 2005). Numerous studies on kenaf management have been done outside the United States, that is, Spain (Manzanares, Tenorio, & Ayerbe, 1997; Moreno et al., 2004; Wood, Muchow, & Ratcliff, 1983), Italy (Mambelli & Grandi, 1995), Greece (Alexopoulou, Christou, Mardikis, & Chatziathanassiou, 2000; Danalatos & Archontoulis, 2010), and Australia (Carberry et al., 1992; Muchow & Carberry, 1993).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some research has been done to develop improved management practices for kenaf yield, but these studies were located in only a few U.S. regions. Studies have focused on management practices, such as planting time, row spacing, population density, fertilization, irrigation, or crop rotation practices in Florida (Joyner & Wilson, 1967), Nebraska (Williams, 1966), California (Bhangoo, Tehrani, & Henderson, 1986), Mississippi (Baldwin & Graham, 2006), Maryland (Campbell & White, 1982; Massey, 1974), New Mexico (Lauriault & Puppala, 2009), and North Carolina (Jordan et al., 2005). Numerous studies on kenaf management have been done outside the United States, that is, Spain (Manzanares, Tenorio, & Ayerbe, 1997; Moreno et al., 2004; Wood, Muchow, & Ratcliff, 1983), Italy (Mambelli & Grandi, 1995), Greece (Alexopoulou, Christou, Mardikis, & Chatziathanassiou, 2000; Danalatos & Archontoulis, 2010), and Australia (Carberry et al., 1992; Muchow & Carberry, 1993).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Optimal management practices have been studies for kenaf yield in the United States, but primarily results are from southern states. Studies have focused on management practices, such as planting time, row spacing, population density, fertilization, irrigation, or crop rotation practices in Florida (Joyner and Wilson, 1967), Nebraska (Williams, 1966), California (Bhangoo et al, 1986), Mississippi (Baldwin and Graham, 2006), Maryland (Massey, 1974; Campbell and White, 1982), New Mexico (Lauriault and Puppala, 2009), and North Carolina (Jordan et al, 2005). Numerous studies on kenaf management were conducted outside of the United States, that is, Spain (Manzanares et al, 1997; González Moreno et al, 2004; Wood et al, 1983), Italy (Mambelli and Grandi, 1995), Greece (Alexopoulou et al, 2000; Danalatos and Archontoulis, 2010), and Australia (Carberry et al, 1992; Muchow and Carberry, 1993).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some research has been done to develop optimal management practices for kenaf yield, but these studies were located in a few U.S. states. Studies have focused on management practices, such as planting time, row spacing, population density, fertilization, irrigation, or crop rotation practices in Florida (Joyner and Wilson, 1967), Nebraska , California (Bhangoo et al, 1986), Mississippi , Maryland , New-Mexico (Lauriault and Puppala, 2009), and North Carolina . Numerous studies on kenaf management are occurring outside of the U.S.,i.e., Spain Moreno et al, 2004;, in Italy (Mambelli and Grandi, 1995),…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%