Paper · 2018 · Australian Journal of Crop Science

Physiological quality and dry mass production of Sorghum bicolor following silicon (Si) foliar application

Rilner Alves Flores; Everton Martins Arruda; Virgínia Damin; et al.

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
34
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The forthcoming of silicon (Si) highly soluble sources provided a suitable alternative to Si use in agroecosystems. There are many benefits associated to Si application in crops, such as improvement in feed quality. In this sense, the aim of this work was to evaluate the effect of Si foliar application on physiological quality, biomass production, and silicon accumulation in Sorghum bicolor. The experiment was conducted under greenhouse condition using an entirely randomized design, with five Si rates (0 as control), 0.84, 1.68, 2.52, and 3.36g L -1 of Si) applied as potassium and sodium silicate, with four repetitions. In each treatment, applied solutions were balanced in potassium in order to isolate the Si effect. The following measurements were taken: growth, biomass production, Si accumulation, and physiological quality. Supplying Si via leaves did not affect the sorghum growth rate and the relative chlorophyll index; however, leaf area increased 23% with the use of 2.36 g L -1 of Si. Physiological variables are influenced by increasing Si rates, with rates close to 1.68 g L -1 of Si causing the best photosynthetic rates and stomatal conductance. The use of potassium silicate as a source of silicon is an alternative for productivity increases up to 30%, but an economic study on the viability of its commercial application in the production chain of Sorghum bicolor is necessary.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar silicon did not affect sorghum growth rate or relative chlorophyll index.

Taxon
Sorghum bicolorSorghum bicolort0
Treatment
Supplying Si via leavese0
Outcome
sorghum growth rate and the relative chlorophyll indexe0
Direction
did not affecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum bicolor
Sorghum bicolor · TaxonNo machine-readable author provided. Pethan assumed (based on copyright claims). · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Supplying Si via leaves did not affect the sorghum growth rate and the relative chlorophyll index”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 838–935 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sorghum bicolor”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf area increased 23% at the stated silicon rate.

Taxon
Sorghum bicolorSorghum bicolort0
Treatment
2.36 g L -1 of Sie0
Outcome
leaf areae0
Direction
increasede0
Value
23%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum bicolor
Sorghum bicolor · TaxonNo machine-readable author provided. Pethan assumed (based on copyright claims). · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“leaf area increased 23% with the use of 2.36 g L -1 of Si”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 946–1003 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sorghum bicolor”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Silicon near 1.68 g L -1 gave the best photosynthetic rates and stomatal conductance.

Taxon
Sorghum bicolorSorghum bicolort0
Treatment
rates close to 1.68 g L -1 of Sie0
Outcome
photosynthetic rates and stomatal conductancee0
Direction
beste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum bicolor
Sorghum bicolor · TaxonNo machine-readable author provided. Pethan assumed (based on copyright claims). · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“rates close to 1.68 g L -1 of Si causing the best photosynthetic rates and stomatal conductance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1073–1168 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sorghum bicolor”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–64 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Potassium silicate was associated with productivity increases up to 30%.

Taxon
Sorghum bicolorSorghum bicolort0
Treatment
potassium silicatee0
Outcome
productivitye0
Direction
increasese0
Value
up to 30%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Sorghum bicolor
Sorghum bicolor · TaxonNo machine-readable author provided. Pethan assumed (based on copyright claims). · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The use of potassium silicate as a source of silicon is an alternative for productivity increases up to 30%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1170–1277 · show in text ↑
t0

“Sorghum bicolor”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 49–64 · show in text ↑

silicon atom · growth · Sorghum bicolor (sorghum)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

silicon atom · physiology: photosynthesis · Sorghum bicolor (sorghum)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

potassium · yield · Sorghum bicolor (sorghum)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 7 positive, 5 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.