Abstract
The field experiments with spring barley cultivar Justina were conducted in 2010–2011. The tested products (Regalis 10 WG, Modus 250 EC, Antywylegacz Plynny 675 SL, Cerone 480 SL) were applied on spring barley at the stage of BBCH 32. The height reduction of spring barley was dependent on the active substance of growth regulators and weather conditions, and it was 0–5.9% (2010) and 1.6–9.8% (2011), respectively. Higher effectiveness of shortening stems of spring barley was obtained after the use of Cerone 480 SL at the dose of 0.75 l/ha. In two years of investigation lack of statistic differences between growth retardants prohexadione-Ca, chloromequat chloride and ethephone regardless of pH spray liquid. Lower pH of spray liquid containing trinexapak ethyl showed better efficacy (shorter stems and lower lodging) in comparison to plots on which trinexapak ethyl on neutral pH was used. The examined growth regulators did not cause any injury to spring barley cultivar Justina. Acidity of spray liquid containing growth regulators increased the yield of spring barley in comparison to untreated plots and plots on which growth regulators were used in neutral pH.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 8
Claim · model-written summary
Barley height reduction varied with regulator substance and weather, reaching 0–5.9% in 2010.
- Taxon
- spring barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgaret0 - Treatment
- growth regulatorse0
- Outcome
- height reductione0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 0–5.9%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The height reduction of spring barley was dependent on the active substance of growth regulators and weather conditions, and it was 0–5.9% (2010)”
t0“spring barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Barley height reduction ranged from 1.6–9.8% in 2011.
- Taxon
- spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Outcome
- height reductione0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 1.6–9.8%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The height reduction of spring barley was dependent on the active substance of growth regulators and weather conditions, and it was 0–5.9% (2010) and 1.6–9.8% (2011)”
t0“spring barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Cerone 480 SL at 0.75 l/ha was more effective at shortening stems.
- Taxon
- spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Cerone 480 SL at the dose of 0.75 l/hae0
- Outcome
- shortening stemse0
- Direction
- Highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher effectiveness of shortening stems of spring barley was obtained after the use of Cerone 480 SL at the dose of 0.75 l/ha.”
t0“spring barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Prohexadione-Ca, chloromequat chloride and ethephone showed no statistical differences across spray pH.
- Taxon
- spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Outcome
- lack of statistic differencese0
- Direction
- lack of statistic differencese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“lack of statistic differences between growth retardants prohexadione-Ca, chloromequat chloride and ethephone regardless of pH spray liquid”
t0“spring barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower spray pH with trinexapak ethyl yielded shorter barley stems than neutral pH.
- Taxon
- spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Lower pH of spray liquid containing trinexapak ethyle0
- Outcome
- shorter stemse0
- Direction
- shortere0
- Comparator
- trinexapak ethyl on neutral pHe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lower pH of spray liquid containing trinexapak ethyl showed better efficacy (shorter stems and lower lodging) in comparison to plots on which trinexapak ethyl on neutral pH was used.”
t0“spring barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower spray pH with trinexapak ethyl yielded less lodging than neutral pH.
- Taxon
- spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Lower pH of spray liquid containing trinexapak ethyle0
- Outcome
- lower lodginge0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- trinexapak ethyl on neutral pHe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Lower pH of spray liquid containing trinexapak ethyl showed better efficacy (shorter stems and lower lodging) in comparison to plots on which trinexapak ethyl on neutral pH was used.”
t0“spring barley”
Claim · model-written summary
The tested growth regulators caused no injury to Justina barley.
- Taxon
- spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Material
- Justinae0
- Treatment
- growth regulatorse0
- Outcome
- injurye0
- Direction
- did not causee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The examined growth regulators did not cause any injury to spring barley cultivar Justina.”
t0“spring barley”
Claim · model-written summary
Acidic regulator spray increased barley yield compared with untreated and neutral-pH treatments.
- Taxon
- spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Acidity of spray liquid containing growth regulatorse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- untreated plots and plots on which growth regulators were used in neutral pHe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Acidity of spray liquid containing growth regulators increased the yield of spring barley in comparison to untreated plots and plots on which growth regulators were used in neutral pH.”
t0“spring barley”
The same questions in other papers
ethyl · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →ph · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →ph · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →class · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
36 papers more in this group
See all 40 papers →application · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
53 papers more in this group
See all 57 papers →application · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
89 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
99 papers more in this group
See all 103 papers →class · crop injury · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.