Paper · 2014 · Agricultural Sciences

The Role of Humic Acid and Proline on Growth, Chemical Constituents and Yield Quantity and Quality of Three Flax Cultivars Grown under Saline Soil Conditions

Bakry Ahmed Bakry; Moamen Hamed Taha; Zainab Ahmed Abdelgawad; et al.

8
claims
24
verbatim quotes
30
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

In order to mitigate the salinity effects on flax grown on moderate saline sandy soil (3275 - 3430 ppm) and irrigated with moderate saline water (2300 - 2460 ppm) field experiments were carried out at the experimental Station of the Faculty of Agriculture, Wadi El-Natrun district El-Behera Governorate—Egypt, during two successive winter seasons of 2012/2013 and 2013/2014. Three flax varieties (Opal, Giza-8 and Mayic) were grown and treated with some chemical additives humic acid (50 kg/fed) and/or foliar applied proline (Control, 50 and 100 mg/L). The results showed the positive responses of Giza-8 variety to the combined application of humic acid and proline and mitigated the salinity effects of soil and irrigation water and reflected on most of the studied characters. Such results indicate the potentiality of mitigation the hazardous effect of salinity with these chemical additives. The data indicated that the highest seed yield, straw yield and oil yield were obtained at humic acid (50 kg/fed) with foliar treatment of proline at rate of (100 mg/L). The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions. Fresh weight increased by 66.6%, 48.7% and 65.5% over controls for Opal, Giza-8 and Mayic varieties, respectively. The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) with Giza-8 variety gave the highest values of seed yield, straw yield and oil yield.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined humic acid and proline improved most studied traits of Giza-8 under salinity.

Material
Giza-8e0
Treatment
combined application of humic acid and prolinee0
Outcome
most of the studied characterse0
Direction
positive responsese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“positive responses of Giza-8 variety to the combined application of humic acid and proline and mitigated the salinity effects of soil and irrigation water and reflected on most of the studied characters”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 577–779 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic acid plus 100 mg/L proline produced the highest seed yield.

Treatment
humic acid (50 kg/fed) with foliar treatment of proline at rate of (100 mg/L)e0
Outcome
seed yielde0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“highest seed yield, straw yield and oil yield were obtained at humic acid (50 kg/fed) with foliar treatment of proline at rate of (100 mg/L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 926–1066 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic acid plus 100 mg/L proline produced the highest straw yield.

Treatment
humic acid (50 kg/fed) with foliar treatment of proline at rate of (100 mg/L)e0
Outcome
straw yielde0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“highest seed yield, straw yield and oil yield were obtained at humic acid (50 kg/fed) with foliar treatment of proline at rate of (100 mg/L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 926–1066 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic acid plus 100 mg/L proline produced the highest oil yield.

Treatment
humic acid (50 kg/fed) with foliar treatment of proline at rate of (100 mg/L)e0
Outcome
oil yielde0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“highest seed yield, straw yield and oil yield were obtained at humic acid (50 kg/fed) with foliar treatment of proline at rate of (100 mg/L)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 926–1066 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic acid plus proline improved fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity.

Material
all flax cultivarse0
Treatment
proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed)e0
Outcome
plant fresh and dry weighte0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Opal fresh weight increased by 66.6% over controls.

Material
Opale0
Treatment
proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed)t1
Outcome
Fresh weighte0
Direction
increasede0
Value
66.6%e0
Comparator
controlse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fresh weight increased by 66.6%, 48.7% and 65.5% over controls for Opal, Giza-8 and Mayic varieties, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1233–1346 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Giza-8 fresh weight increased by 48.7% over controls.

Material
Giza-8e0
Treatment
proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed)t1
Outcome
Fresh weighte0
Direction
increasede0
Value
48.7%e0
Comparator
controlse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fresh weight increased by 66.6%, 48.7% and 65.5% over controls for Opal, Giza-8 and Mayic varieties, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1233–1346 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mayic fresh weight increased by 65.5% over controls.

Material
Mayice0
Treatment
proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed)t1
Outcome
Fresh weighte0
Direction
increasede0
Value
65.5%e0
Comparator
controlse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Linum usitatissimum
Linum usitatissimum · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fresh weight increased by 66.6%, 48.7% and 65.5% over controls for Opal, Giza-8 and Mayic varieties, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1233–1346 · show in text ↑
t0

“Flax”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 108–112 · show in text ↑
t1

“The interaction of proline at (100 mg/L) with humic acid at rate of (50 kg/fed) improved plant fresh and dry weight in all flax cultivars under salinity conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1231 · show in text ↑

other · yield · Linum usitatissimum (flax)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

application · yield · Linum usitatissimum (flax)Positive and negative results

54 papers: 50 positive, 4 negative or no effect

49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

50 papers more in this group

See all 54 papers →

other · growth · Linum usitatissimum (flax)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

other · quality: oil · Linum usitatissimum (flax)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

application · quality: oil · Linum usitatissimum (flax)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

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.