Paper · 2015 · American Journal of Plant Sciences

Foliar Application of Micronutrients Enhances Wheat Growth, Yield and Related Attributes

Muhammad Zain; Imran Khan; Rashid Waseem Khan Qadri; et al.

4
claims
5
verbatim quotes
69
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Wheat is one of the most essential foods in the world. To increase its productivity, nutrient management is one of the most important factors. To assess the possible role of micronutrients in improving wheat yield, an experiment was conducted to evaluate the wheat performance by foliar application of micronutrients. Treatments consist of T1 = No spray, T2 = Spraying plants with tube well water (control), T3 = Spraying plants with 1.6 kg FeSO4/100 L water/acre, T4 = Spraying plants with 3 kg ZnSO4 (21%)/100 L water/acre, T5 = Spraying plants with 1 kg MnSO4/100 L water/acre, T6 = Spraying plants with (FeSO4 + MnSO4), T7 = Spraying plants with (FeSO4 + ZnSO4), T8 = Spraying plants with (ZnSO4 + MnSO4), and T9 = Spraying plants with (FeSO4 + ZnSO4 + MnSO4). Results showed that foliar application of micronutrients substantially improved plant height, spike length cm, spikelets/spike, grains/spike, test weight, Tillers m-2, grain and biological as well as harvest index of wheat. Among treatments, foliar application of FeSO4 + ZnSO4 + MnSO4 remained comparatively better regarding yield related attributes of whea

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar micronutrients improved wheat height, spike length, and spikelets per spike.

Treatment
foliar application of micronutrientse0
Outcome
plant height, spike length cm, spikelets/spikee0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“foliar application of micronutrients substantially improved plant height, spike length cm, spikelets/spike, grains/spike, test weight, Tillers m-2, grain and biological as well as harvest index of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 785–987 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar micronutrients improved wheat grains per spike, test weight, and tiller density.

Treatment
foliar application of micronutrientse0
Outcome
grains/spike, test weight, Tillers m-2e0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“foliar application of micronutrients substantially improved plant height, spike length cm, spikelets/spike, grains/spike, test weight, Tillers m-2, grain and biological as well as harvest index of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 785–987 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar micronutrients improved wheat grain yield, biological yield, and harvest index.

Treatment
foliar application of micronutrientse0
Outcome
grain and biological as well as harvest indexe0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“foliar application of micronutrients substantially improved plant height, spike length cm, spikelets/spike, grains/spike, test weight, Tillers m-2, grain and biological as well as harvest index of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 785–987 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The combined FeSO4, ZnSO4, and MnSO4 spray was comparatively better for wheat yield attributes.

Treatment
foliar application of FeSO4 + ZnSO4 + MnSO4e0
Outcome
yield related attributese0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
comparativelye0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“foliar application of FeSO4 + ZnSO4 + MnSO4 remained comparatively better regarding yield related attributes of whea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1007–1123 · show in text ↑
t0

“Wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–51 · show in text ↑

zinc sulfate · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

100 papers: 98 positive, 2 negative or no effect

97 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

96 papers more in this group

See all 100 papers →

manganese(II) sulfate · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

iron(2+) sulfate (anhydrous) · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

16 papers: 16 positive, 0 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

application · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

43 papers: 38 positive, 5 negative or no effect

37 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

39 papers more in this group

See all 43 papers →

micronutrient · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

78 papers: 71 positive, 7 negative or no effect

70 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

74 papers more in this group

See all 78 papers →

application · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

877 papers: 795 positive, 82 negative or no effect

794 papers in the same direction as this paper · 75 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

873 papers more in this group

See all 877 papers →

micronutrient · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)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 →

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.