Abstract
Soil degradation and aridity due to long-term unbalanced fertilization and scarce precipitation limit the productivity of apple trees in the Loess Plateau of China. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of composted manure (CM) plus chemical fertilizer (CF) applications on the aridity response and yield of apple trees. Five treatments [CF (C), CF plus 5/10 kg CM I per tree (CM1-L/H), and CF plus 5/10 kg CM II per tree (CM2-L/H)] were applied in a 10-year-old Red Fuji apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) orchard over a 4-year study period. The application of CM plus CF increased soil organic carbon, decreased soil bulk density, and optimized porosity. Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates respectively increased soil water storage in the 20–60 cm layer by 1.4% and 4.8%, increased available soil water content in the 0–100 cm soil layer by 4.1%–44.8% and 10.4%–60.2%, elevated the water content of apple leaves (w%) by 1.3% and 3.7%, improved leaf potential by 15.9% and 30.0%, and decreased proline content by 16.1% and 28.5%. Thus, CM application decreased damage due to aridity and enhanced the photosynthetic capacity of apple trees, ultimately elevating apple yield by 8.8% and 13.3% under CML and CMH. The application of CM plus CF is an effective fertilization strategy for mitigating aridity stress and improving apple yield in the Loess Plateau.
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Composted manure plus chemical fertilizer raised soil organic carbon.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“The application of CM plus CF increased soil organic carbon, decreased soil bulk density, and optimized porosity.”
e1“apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) orchard”
Claim · model-written summary
Composted manure plus chemical fertilizer lowered soil bulk density.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“The application of CM plus CF increased soil organic carbon, decreased soil bulk density, and optimized porosity.”
Claim · model-written summary
Composted manure plus chemical fertilizer optimized soil porosity.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“The application of CM plus CF increased soil organic carbon, decreased soil bulk density, and optimized porosity.”
Claim · model-written summary
Low compost rate increased water storage in the 20–60 cm soil layer by 1.4%.
- Treatment
- Low (5 kg per tree; CML)e0
- Outcome
- soil water storagee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 1.4%e0
- Qualifier
- 20–60 cm layere0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates respectively increased soil water storage in the 20–60 cm layer by 1.4% and 4.8%”
Claim · model-written summary
High compost rate increased water storage in the 20–60 cm soil layer by 4.8%.
- Treatment
- high (10 kg per tree; CMH)e0
- Outcome
- soil water storagee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.8%e0
- Qualifier
- 20–60 cm layere0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates respectively increased soil water storage in the 20–60 cm layer by 1.4% and 4.8%”
Claim · model-written summary
Low compost rate increased available soil water by 4.1%–44.8%.
- Treatment
- Low (5 kg per tree; CML)e0
- Outcome
- available soil water contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.1%–44.8%e0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates respectively increased soil water storage in the 20–60 cm layer by 1.4% and 4.8%, increased available soil water content in the 0–100 cm soil layer by 4.1%–44.8% and 10.4%–60.2%”
Claim · model-written summary
High compost rate increased available soil water by 10.4%–60.2%.
- Treatment
- high (10 kg per tree; CMH)e0
- Outcome
- available soil water contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 10.4%–60.2%e0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates respectively increased soil water storage in the 20–60 cm layer by 1.4% and 4.8%, increased available soil water content in the 0–100 cm soil layer by 4.1%–44.8% and 10.4%–60.2%”
Claim · model-written summary
Low compost rate increased apple leaf water content by 1.3%.
- Taxon
- apple
Malus domesticae0 - Treatment
- Low (5 kg per tree; CML)e0
- Outcome
- water content of apple leaves (w%)e0
- Direction
- elevatede0
- Value
- 1.3%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates respectively increased soil water storage in the 20–60 cm layer by 1.4% and 4.8%, increased available soil water content in the 0–100 cm soil layer by 4.1%–44.8% and 10.4%–60.2%, elevated the water content of apple leaves (w%) by 1.3% and 3.7%”
Claim · model-written summary
High compost rate increased apple leaf water content by 3.7%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- high (10 kg per tree; CMH)e0
- Outcome
- water content of apple leaves (w%)e0
- Direction
- elevatede0
- Value
- 3.7%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates respectively increased soil water storage in the 20–60 cm layer by 1.4% and 4.8%, increased available soil water content in the 0–100 cm soil layer by 4.1%–44.8% and 10.4%–60.2%, elevated the water content of apple leaves (w%) by 1.3% and 3.7%”
Claim · model-written summary
Low compost rate improved apple leaf potential by 15.9%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae1
- Treatment
- Low (5 kg per tree; CML)e2
- Outcome
- leaf potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 15.9%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improved leaf potential by 15.9% and 30.0%”
e1“apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) orchard”
e2“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates”
Claim · model-written summary
High compost rate improved apple leaf potential by 30.0%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae1
- Treatment
- high (10 kg per tree; CMH)e2
- Outcome
- leaf potentiale0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 30.0%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“improved leaf potential by 15.9% and 30.0%”
e1“apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) orchard”
e2“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates”
Claim · model-written summary
Low compost rate decreased proline content by 16.1%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae1
- Treatment
- Low (5 kg per tree; CML)e2
- Outcome
- proline contente0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 16.1%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreased proline content by 16.1% and 28.5%”
e1“apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) orchard”
e2“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates”
Claim · model-written summary
High compost rate decreased proline content by 28.5%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae1
- Treatment
- high (10 kg per tree; CMH)e2
- Outcome
- proline contente0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 28.5%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreased proline content by 16.1% and 28.5%”
e1“apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) orchard”
e2“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors concluded compost application reduced aridity damage and improved apple photosynthetic capacity.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- CM applicatione0
- Outcome
- damage due to aridity and enhanced the photosynthetic capacitye0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“CM application decreased damage due to aridity and enhanced the photosynthetic capacity of apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Low compost rate raised apple yield by 8.8%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- Low (5 kg per tree; CML)e1
- Outcome
- apple yielde0
- Direction
- elevatinge0
- Value
- 8.8%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ultimately elevating apple yield by 8.8% and 13.3% under CML and CMH”
e1“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates”
Claim · model-written summary
High compost rate raised apple yield by 13.3%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- high (10 kg per tree; CMH)e1
- Outcome
- apple yielde0
- Direction
- elevatinge0
- Value
- 13.3%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“ultimately elevating apple yield by 8.8% and 13.3% under CML and CMH”
e1“Low (5 kg per tree; CML) and high (10 kg per tree; CMH) CM application rates”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend composted manure plus chemical fertilizer to mitigate aridity and improve apple yield.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- CM plus CFe0
- Outcome
- mitigating aridity stress and improving apple yielde0
- Setting
- Loess Plateaue0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The application of CM plus CF is an effective fertilization strategy for mitigating aridity stress and improving apple yield in the Loess Plateau.”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · soil: physics · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →fertilization · soil: chemistry · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 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.