Abstract
Background/Objectives: The availability of nutrients to plants is one of the main constraints under calcareous soil. This study aimed to investigate the influence of humic acid on nutrients availability and fruit yield of apple trees at district Ziarat using red delicious apple variety of same age. Methods: Six rates of humic acid were tested in randomized complete block design (RCBD) with three replications. These rates were included as T1 = Control (0.0 g Humic acid), T2 = 50 g potassium humate tree-1, T3 = 75 g potassium humate tree-1, T4 = 100 g potassium humate tree-1, T5 =125 g potassium humate tree-1 and T6 = 150 g potassium humate tree-1. Findings: The results showed that the apple trees received 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 recorded statistically at par but higher fruit set (71.68 and 74.66%) and fruit yield (262.15 and 264.46 kg tree-1) and higher fruit retention (91.63%) with minimum fruit drop (8.37%) at 150 g potassium humate tree-1. However, control treatment resulted in greater fruit drop (72.43%) and minimum fruit set (21.10%). Similarly, the application of 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 manifested higher leaf macro and micro nutrients concentration. There was positive and significant correlation between apple fruit yield and leaf nutrient concentration which evidenced the beneficial and stimulatory effect of humic acid on nutrient availability and yield. Applications/Improvements: From this study it is suggested that different sources of humic acid need to be tested on apple so that the best source of humic acid can be found for quality fruit production of apple. Keywords: Apple Trees, Calcareous Soil, Fruit, Yield, Humic Acid, Leaf Nutrient Concentration
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
125 g potassium humate tree-1 produced higher fruit set (71.68%).
- Taxon
- apple trees
Malus domesticae0 - Treatment
- 125 g potassium humate tree-1e1
- Outcome
- fruit sete0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 71.68e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the apple trees received 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 recorded statistically at par but higher fruit set (71.68 and 74.66%) and fruit yield (262.15 and 264.46 kg tree-1) and higher fruit retention (91.63%) with minimum fruit drop (8.37%) at 150 g potassium humate tree-1.”
e1“T5 =125 g potassium humate tree-1”
Claim · model-written summary
150 g potassium humate tree-1 produced higher fruit set (74.66%).
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- 150 g potassium humate tree-1e0
- Outcome
- fruit sete0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 74.66%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the apple trees received 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 recorded statistically at par but higher fruit set (71.68 and 74.66%) and fruit yield (262.15 and 264.46 kg tree-1) and higher fruit retention (91.63%) with minimum fruit drop (8.37%) at 150 g potassium humate tree-1.”
Claim · model-written summary
125 g potassium humate tree-1 produced higher fruit yield (262.15 kg tree-1).
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- 125 g potassium humate tree-1e1
- Outcome
- fruit yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 262.15e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the apple trees received 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 recorded statistically at par but higher fruit set (71.68 and 74.66%) and fruit yield (262.15 and 264.46 kg tree-1) and higher fruit retention (91.63%) with minimum fruit drop (8.37%) at 150 g potassium humate tree-1.”
e1“T5 =125 g potassium humate tree-1”
Claim · model-written summary
150 g potassium humate tree-1 produced higher fruit yield (264.46 kg tree-1).
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- 150 g potassium humate tree-1e0
- Outcome
- fruit yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 264.46 kg tree-1e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the apple trees received 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 recorded statistically at par but higher fruit set (71.68 and 74.66%) and fruit yield (262.15 and 264.46 kg tree-1) and higher fruit retention (91.63%) with minimum fruit drop (8.37%) at 150 g potassium humate tree-1.”
Claim · model-written summary
At 150 g potassium humate per tree, fruit retention was higher at 91.63%.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- 150 g potassium humate tree-1e0
- Outcome
- fruit retentione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 91.63%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the apple trees received 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 recorded statistically at par but higher fruit set (71.68 and 74.66%) and fruit yield (262.15 and 264.46 kg tree-1) and higher fruit retention (91.63%) with minimum fruit drop (8.37%) at 150 g potassium humate tree-1.”
Claim · model-written summary
At 150 g potassium humate per tree, fruit drop was minimal at 8.37%.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- 150 g potassium humate tree-1e0
- Outcome
- fruit drope0
- Direction
- minimume0
- Value
- 8.37%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The results showed that the apple trees received 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 recorded statistically at par but higher fruit set (71.68 and 74.66%) and fruit yield (262.15 and 264.46 kg tree-1) and higher fruit retention (91.63%) with minimum fruit drop (8.37%) at 150 g potassium humate tree-1.”
Claim · model-written summary
Control trees had greater fruit drop of 72.43%.
- Taxon
- Apple treesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- control treatmente0
- Outcome
- fruit drope0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 72.43%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, control treatment resulted in greater fruit drop (72.43%) and minimum fruit set (21.10%).”
t0“Apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Control trees had minimum fruit set of 21.10%.
- Taxon
- Apple treesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- control treatmente0
- Outcome
- fruit sete0
- Direction
- minimume0
- Value
- 21.10%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, control treatment resulted in greater fruit drop (72.43%) and minimum fruit set (21.10%).”
t0“Apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
At 125 g potassium humate per tree, leaf macro and micronutrient concentrations were higher.
- Taxon
- Apple treesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- 125 g potassium humate tree-1e1
- Outcome
- leaf macro and micro nutrients concentratione0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, the application of 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 manifested higher leaf macro and micro nutrients concentration.”
t0“Apple trees”
e1“T5 =125 g potassium humate tree-1”
Claim · model-written summary
At 150 g potassium humate per tree, leaf macro and micronutrient concentrations were higher.
- Taxon
- Apple treesMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- 150 g potassium humate tree-1e0
- Outcome
- leaf macro and micro nutrients concentratione0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, the application of 125 and 150 g potassium humate tree-1 manifested higher leaf macro and micro nutrients concentration.”
t0“Apple trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Apple fruit yield correlated positively and significantly with leaf nutrient concentration.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Outcome
- apple fruit yielde0
- Direction
- positivee0
- Comparator
- leaf nutrient concentratione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was positive and significant correlation between apple fruit yield and leaf nutrient concentration which evidenced the beneficial and stimulatory effect of humic acid on nutrient availability and yield.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest testing different humic acid sources for quality apple fruit production.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Outcome
- different sources of humic acid need to be tested on applee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“From this study it is suggested that different sources of humic acid need to be tested on apple so that the best source of humic acid can be found for quality fruit production of apple.”
The same questions in other papers
potassium · nutrient: content · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →potassium · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 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.