Paper · 2005 · Journal of Ornamental Horticulture

Effect of Graded Doses of Nitrogen in Split form on Growth, Flowering and Yield Parameters in Rose

Anil Kumar Singh

7
claims
13
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Two years old plants of rose cv. Gruss-an-Teplitz having uniform growth were selected for the study. The treatments comprised of four levels of nitroge (200, 400, 600 and 800 kg/ha) and their four split doses (2, 3, 4 and 5). Number of second order lateral shoots/plant, dry weight of leaves, leaf area, average weight of flower and number of flpwers/m2/year significantly increased by application of 800 kg N/ha, which were at par with 600 kg N/ha. However, maximum fresh biomass was recorded with 600 kg N/ha. Maximum number of second order lateral shoots/plant was recorded by two split applications of nitrogen; whereas three split applications gave maximum leaf area, which was at par with two split applications. Split applications of nitrogen treatment did not show any conspicuous effect on various flowering attributes. This indicated that nitrogenous fertilizers can be applied in two split application in rose cultivation.

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 resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

800 kg N/ha significantly increased second order lateral shoots, leaf dry weight and leaf area, matching 600 kg N/ha.

Taxon
roset0
Treatment
800 kg N/hae0
Outcome
Number of second order lateral shoots/plant, dry weight of leaves, leaf areae0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
600 kg N/hae0

Verbatim

e0

“Number of second order lateral shoots/plant, dry weight of leaves, leaf area, average weight of flower and number of flpwers/m2/year significantly increased by application of 800 kg N/ha, which were at par with 600 kg N/ha.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 226–449 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

800 kg N/ha significantly increased flower weight and flower number, matching 600 kg N/ha.

Taxon
roset0
Treatment
800 kg N/hae0
Outcome
average weight of flower and number of flpwers/m2/yeare0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
600 kg N/hae0

Verbatim

e0

“average weight of flower and number of flpwers/m2/year significantly increased by application of 800 kg N/ha, which were at par with 600 kg N/ha.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 304–449 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fresh biomass was greatest at 600 kg N/ha.

Taxon
roset0
Treatment
600 kg N/hae0
Outcome
fresh biomasse0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“maximum fresh biomass was recorded with 600 kg N/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 459–510 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Two split nitrogen applications gave the greatest second order shoot number.

Taxon
roset0
Treatment
two split applications of nitrogene0
Outcome
number of second order lateral shoots/plante0
Direction
Maximume0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Maximum number of second order lateral shoots/plant was recorded by two split applications of nitrogen”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 512–614 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Three split applications gave the greatest leaf area and matched two applications.

Taxon
roset0
Treatment
three split applicationse0
Outcome
leaf areae0
Direction
maximume0
Comparator
two split applicationse0

Verbatim

e0

“three split applications gave maximum leaf area, which was at par with two split applications”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 624–717 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–98 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen splitting showed no conspicuous effect on flowering attributes.

Taxon
roset0
Treatment
Split applications of nitrogene0
Outcome
various flowering attributese0
Direction
did not show any conspicuous effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Split applications of nitrogen treatment did not show any conspicuous effect on various flowering attributes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 719–827 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rose”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–98 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend two split nitrogen applications for rose cultivation.

Taxon
rosee0
Outcome
two split application in rose cultivatione0

Verbatim

e0

“nitrogenous fertilizers can be applied in two split application in rose cultivation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 849–932 · show in text ↑

nitrogen · phenology · RosaPositive and negative results

6 papers: 4 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

nitrogen · growth · RosaPositive and negative results

16 papers: 15 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 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.