Abstract
Abstract The objective of this field study was to determine the yield response of wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) to the direct and residual effects of liming in relation to variety, soil acidity, Al toxicity, P availability, and disease incidence in five Oxisols of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil under successive wheat‐soybean ( Glycine max L. Merrill) cropping. This work was carried out under field conditions using various limestone treatments arranged in a randomized block design and replicated four times. Plots were 6 m long ✕ 2.4 m wide with 12 rows planted 20 cm apart at the rate of 90 kg/ha. The soils used in this investigation were in the suborder Udox. While Brazilian wheat varieties developed under acid soil conditions tended not to respond to liming due to their tolerance to exchangeable Al and possibly Mn, wheat varieties from other countries, developed under less acid soil conditions, did respond significantly to liming because of their susceptibility to soil Al and possibly Mn. Some Brazilian wheat varieties did respond to liming under high soil acidity and exchangeable Al levels. Liming to bring soil pH between 4.8 and 5.7 and reduce toxic Al levels below 1.5 meq/100 g was a more valid criterion than raising soil pH to neutrality in order to maximize yields. Liming to pH 5.7 or higher increased the incidence of Ophiobolus graminis and a soil‐borne mosaic.
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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Brazilian wheat varieties developed in acid soils tended not to respond to liming.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Material
- Brazilian wheat varietiese0
- Treatment
- liminge0
- Compound
- exchangeable Ale0
- Outcome
- respond to liminge0
- Direction
- not to responde0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“While Brazilian wheat varieties developed under acid soil conditions tended not to respond to liming due to their tolerance to exchangeable Al and possibly Mn”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat varieties from other countries responded significantly to liming.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- wheat varieties from other countriese0
- Treatment
- liminge0
- Outcome
- respond significantly to liminge0
- Direction
- respond significantlye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“wheat varieties from other countries, developed under less acid soil conditions, did respond significantly to liming because of their susceptibility to soil Al and possibly Mn”
Claim · model-written summary
Some Brazilian wheat varieties responded to liming under high acidity and exchangeable Al.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- Brazilian wheat varietiese0
- Treatment
- liminge0
- Outcome
- respond to liminge0
- Direction
- did responde0
- Qualifier
- high soil acidity and exchangeable Al levelse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Some Brazilian wheat varieties did respond to liming under high soil acidity and exchangeable Al levels.”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming to pH 4.8–5.7 and toxic Al below 1.5 meq/100 g was judged a better yield criterion than liming to neutrality.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- Liminge0
- Outcome
- maximize yieldse0
- Value
- 4.8 and 5.7e0
- Qualifier
- below 1.5 meq/100 ge0
- Comparator
- raising soil pH to neutralitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Liming to bring soil pH between 4.8 and 5.7 and reduce toxic Al levels below 1.5 meq/100 g was a more valid criterion than raising soil pH to neutrality in order to maximize yields.”
e1“While Brazilian wheat varieties developed under acid soil conditions tended not to respond to liming due to their tolerance to exchangeable Al and possibly Mn”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming to pH 5.7 or higher increased Ophiobolus graminis incidence.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- Liming to pH 5.7 or highere0
- Interactor
- Ophiobolus graminis
Gaeumannomyces graminise0pathogen - Outcome
- incidence of Ophiobolus graminise0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Liming to pH 5.7 or higher increased the incidence of Ophiobolus graminis and a soil‐borne mosaic.”
e1“While Brazilian wheat varieties developed under acid soil conditions tended not to respond to liming due to their tolerance to exchangeable Al and possibly Mn”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming to pH 5.7 or higher increased soil-borne mosaic incidence.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume1
- Treatment
- Liming to pH 5.7 or highere0
- Interactor
- soil‐borne mosaice0pathogen
- Outcome
- incidence of Ophiobolus graminis and a soil‐borne mosaice0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Liming to pH 5.7 or higher increased the incidence of Ophiobolus graminis and a soil‐borne mosaic.”
e1“While Brazilian wheat varieties developed under acid soil conditions tended not to respond to liming due to their tolerance to exchangeable Al and possibly Mn”
The same questions in other papers
lime · Gaeumannomyces graminis · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
lime · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →ph · disease · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.