Full Length Research Article
RETRACTED ARTICLE: Sainfoin (Onobrychis arenaria) Productivity Depending on Organic and Mineral Fertilizers
Matvey Yakovlev*, Andrey Petrov, Ivan Lavrishchev, Ivan Karkhardin, Anna Pastukhova
Adv. life sci., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 77-83, February 2024
*- Corresponding Author: Matvey Yakovlev (mayakovlev@hotmail.com)
Authors' Affiliations
[Date Received: 16/10/2022; Date Revised: 27/12/2023; Date Published: 25/02/2024]
Abstract
Introduction
Methods
Results
Discussion
References
Abstract
Background: Numerous experiments in Russia and abroad indicate that the productivity of natural hayfields and pastures is high enough only if legumes are present in the herbage. It is also of great importance to increase their productivity by applying mineral fertilizers, which often define the final productivity of the herbage. To determine the effect of organic and mineral fertilizers on the productivity of sainfoin.
Methods: The main method used in the study was a field experiment combined with laboratory analysis. Measurements of plant density were carried out in the spring before each harvesting of cover crops and sainfoin. In the course of the study, phenological and morphological observations, accounting, and evaluation of the quality of sainfoin were carried out. The structure of the herbage was evaluated according to the following indicators: plant density, plant height, leafiness, and the area of the assimilation surface of grasses. Measurements were carried out in spring before each harvesting of grasses. Height measurements were based on the phases of plant development.
Results: Final yield data show that fertilizers have a significant impact. Thus, the yield of sainfoin and cover crops in 2019 (in the first year of the experiment) was: 4.7 t/ha for variant 8 and 4.5 t/ha for the control variant. In 2020 and 2021, the yield of experimental variant 8 exceeded that of the control variant. Statistical processing of the results of the experiment confirms the positive effect of fertilizers on the yield.
Conclusions: The best results were achieved with the use of 30 t/ha of organic fertilizers + N60 P60 K40.
Keywords: Sainfoin; Organic Fertilizers; Mineral Fertilizers; Yield; Survival
Retraction Note
27 Nov 2025: The Editor-in-Chief has approved retraction of this article on the following grounds.
The paper's text and tables report completely different data for the same outcomes.
Contradiction 1 (Primary Yield): The paper's main finding (yield) is reported with three different sets of numbers.
Abstract: Claims 2019 yield was 4.7 t/ha (Variant 8) and 4.5 t/ha (Control).
Results Text: Repeats the same incorrect numbers: 4.7 t/ha (Variant 8) and 4.5 t/ha (Control).
Table 6 (Actual Data): Shows the yield as 5.5 t/ha (Variant 8) and 2.2 t/ha (Control). The abstract and discussion are based on data that is not present in the results tables.
Contradiction 2 (Methodology): The methods and results describe different experimental treatments.
Methods: Defines Variant 8 as "30 t/ha of organic fertilizers (manure) + N60P60K40".
Results: Describes Variant 8 as "30 t/ha of organic fertilizers (manure) + N30P30K50". The paper analyzes a different fertilizer concentration than what is defined in the experimental design.
Contradiction 3 (Productivity): The text in the results section contradicts the data in Table 7.
Text: Claims the highest productivity was in Variant 7 ("2.9 t/ha of feed units" and "0.18 t/ha" of protein).
Table 7: Shows Variant 7's productivity was 3.4 t/ha of feed units and 0.33 t/ha of protein.
Text: Claims the control's productivity was "1.6 t/ha and 0.07 t/ha".
Table 7: Shows the control's productivity was 1.7 t/ha and 0.13 t/ha.
Contradiction 4 (Leaf Surface Index): The text reports data that is not in the corresponding table.
Text: Claims the leaf surface index was "2.3 in the control variant and 4 in variant 8".
Table 5: Shows the control's index was 1.2 / 1.4 and Variant 8's was 1.8 / 2.5. The numbers "2.3" and "4" are not present.
Table 5 (Index of the leaf surface) reports a value of "22.6" for Variant 4 (First harvest). All other values in this table range from 1.2 to 2.5. This massive outlier is unexplained and appears to be a typesetting error that corrupts the data.
The authors have not responded to the retraction notice.
