Paper · 1983

RESPONSE OF WHEAT TO FIVE NITROGEN FERTILISERS IN NORTHERN CANTERBURY

R. C. Stephen; D. J. Saville; B. F. Quin

3
claims
7
verbatim quotes
3
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The effects of pelleted urea, an aqueous urea solution, ammonium sulphate, a lime/ammonium nitrate mix and potassium nitrate on grain yield in winter-sown 'Rongotea' wheat were assessed in 13 field experiments conducted in three cropping seasons. The nitrogen fertilisers were applied in early spring to the tillering wheat at rates which supplied 35, 70, 105 and 140 kg N/ha. Grain yield responses to applied nitrogen were markedly affected by spring-summer rainfall and varied widely among cropping years and sites. Differences among nitrogen fertilisers were generally small and not significant, apart from an inferiority of the urea solution. Additional Keywords: urea, ammonium sulphate, ammonium nitrate, potassium nitrate, spring-summer rairifa/1, 'plant-available' nitrogen, shallow and deep soils.

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 3

Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat grain yield responses to applied nitrogen varied widely among years and sites and were strongly affected by spring-summer rainfall.

Treatment
applied nitrogene0
Outcome
Grain yield responsese0
Qualifier
spring-summer rainfalle0

Not reportedDirection

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

“Grain yield responses to applied nitrogen were markedly affected by spring-summer rainfall and varied widely among cropping years and sites”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 377–516 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 12–17 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain yield differences among nitrogen fertilizers in wheat were generally small and not significant.

Treatment
nitrogen fertiliserse0
Outcome
Differencese0
Direction
smalle0
Comparator
nitrogen fertiliserse0

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

“Differences among nitrogen fertilisers were generally small and not significant”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 518–597 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 12–17 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea solution yielded worse than the other nitrogen fertilizers in wheat.

Treatment
urea solutione0
Outcome
grain yielde1
Direction
inferioritye0
Comparator
nitrogen fertiliserse0

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

“Differences among nitrogen fertilisers were generally small and not significant, apart from an inferiority of the urea solution”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 518–645 · show in text ↑
e1

“grain yield in winter-sown”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 128–154 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 12–17 · show in text ↑

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

2,061 papers: 1,737 positive, 324 negative or no effect

323 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,737 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. positive

2,057 papers more in this group

See all 2,061 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.