Paper · 1967 · Australian Journal of Agricultural Research

Phytotoxicity from plant residues. I. The influence of rotted wheat straw on seedling growth

RWL Kimber

7
claims
10
verbatim quotes
117
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Cold aqueous extracts of wheat straw, that had been rotted for periods up to 6 weeks, have been shown to inhibit the growth of wheat and oats grown under aseptic conditions. The degree of inhibition varied with the time of rotting and was at a maximum after 2–6 days. Roots were far more sensitive than shoots to inhibitors. Wheat shoots were inhibited more than oat shoots, but oat roots were inhibited more than wheat roots. Prolonged storage of straw or weathering of wheat stubble in the field reduced this inhibitory effect

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rotted wheat straw extract inhibited wheat growth under aseptic conditions.

Treatment
Cold aqueous extracts of wheat strawe0
Outcome
growth of wheate0
Direction
inhibite0
Setting
aseptic conditionse0

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

“Cold aqueous extracts of wheat straw, that had been rotted for periods up to 6 weeks, have been shown to inhibit the growth of wheat and oats grown under aseptic conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–172 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rotted wheat straw extract inhibited oat growth under aseptic conditions.

Treatment
Cold aqueous extracts of wheat strawe0
Outcome
growth of wheat and oatse0
Direction
inhibite0
Setting
aseptic conditionse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Avena sativa
Avena sativa · TaxonSendelbach ( talk ) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Cold aqueous extracts of wheat straw, that had been rotted for periods up to 6 weeks, have been shown to inhibit the growth of wheat and oats grown under aseptic conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–172 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Inhibition varied with rotting time and peaked after 2–6 days.

Treatment
time of rottinge0
Outcome
degree of inhibitione0
Direction
maximume0
Value
2–6 dayse0

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

t0

“wheat straw on seedling growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–92 · show in text ↑
e0

“The degree of inhibition varied with the time of rotting and was at a maximum after 2–6 days”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 174–266 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Roots were more sensitive to inhibitors than shoots.

Organ / stage
Rootse0
Outcome
sensitivee0
Direction
far moree0
Comparator
shootse0

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

t0

“wheat straw on seedling growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–92 · show in text ↑
e0

“Roots were far more sensitive than shoots to inhibitors”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 268–323 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat shoots were inhibited more than oat shoots.

Organ / stage
shootse0
Outcome
shoots were inhibitede0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
oat shootse0

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

“Wheat shoots were inhibited more than oat shoots, but oat roots were inhibited more than wheat roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 325–425 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Oat roots were inhibited more than wheat roots.

Organ / stage
rootse0
Outcome
roots were inhibitede0
Direction
moree0
Comparator
wheat rootse0

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

Avena sativa
Avena sativa · TaxonSendelbach ( talk ) · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Wheat shoots were inhibited more than oat shoots, but oat roots were inhibited more than wheat roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 325–425 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Prolonged straw storage or field weathering reduced inhibitory effects.

Treatment
Prolonged storage of straw or weathering of wheat stubblee0
Outcome
inhibitory effecte0
Direction
reducede0
Setting
fielde0

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

t0

“wheat straw on seedling growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 62–92 · show in text ↑
e0

“Prolonged storage of straw or weathering of wheat stubble in the field reduced this inhibitory effect”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 427–528 · show in text ↑

cold · growth · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 5 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

botanical · growth · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results

22 papers: 15 positive, 7 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

18 papers more in this group

See all 22 papers →

cold · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

88 papers: 34 positive, 54 negative or no effect

53 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

84 papers more in this group

See all 88 papers →

botanical · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

435 papers: 206 positive, 229 negative or no effect

228 papers in the same direction as this paper · 206 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

431 papers more in this group

See all 435 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.