Abstract
In the years 2015-2016 in Sahryń (50°41′ N, 23°47’ E) a field experiment, with the aim of assessing profitability of foliar nutrition of sugar beet with silicon, was carried out. The following products containing silicon were used in the experiment: Actisil, Herbagreen Z20 and Optysil. Each of them was applied once, twice and thrice. For each combination, the gross production value, the costs of foliar nutrition, the net production value and the profitability index were calculated. The total costs of silicon foliar application varied depending on the number of treatments and the applied product from 50 to 402 PLN/ha. The gross production value of sugar beet due to foliar nutrition with silicon increased by 1.3-22.9% for the research period, and the net production value by 5.5-19.0%. A large variation in the achieved financial results was observed in 2015, in which there were particularly unfavorable conditions for the growth and yield of sugar beet. In the more favorable year for growing sugar beet (2016), the difference was smaller. The largest increase in the gross and net production value of sugar beet was ensured by the double and triple application of Actisil fertilizer and the triple application of the Optysil growth stimulator. However, the largest profitability indicator (11.26) was characterized by a single Optysil growth stimulator application.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nutrition with silicon increased the gross production value of sugar beet by 1.3-22.9% over the research period.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise2 - Treatment
- foliar nutrition with silicone2
- Outcome
- gross production valuee2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- 1.3-22.9%e2
- Qualifier
- for the research periode2
- Setting
- Sahryńe1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“In the years 2015-2016 in Sahryń (50°41′ N, 23°47’ E) a field experiment”
e2“The gross production value of sugar beet due to foliar nutrition with silicon increased by 1.3-22.9% for the research period, and the net production value by 5.5-19.0%”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nutrition with silicon increased the net production value of sugar beet by 5.5-19.0% over the research period.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise2
- Treatment
- foliar nutrition with silicone2
- Outcome
- net production valuee2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Value
- 5.5-19.0%e2
- Qualifier
- for the research periode2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“The gross production value of sugar beet due to foliar nutrition with silicon increased by 1.3-22.9% for the research period, and the net production value by 5.5-19.0%”
Claim · model-written summary
The variation in the achieved financial results of sugar beet was large in 2015, under particularly unfavorable conditions.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise3
- Outcome
- variation in the achieved financial resultse3
- Qualifier
- particularly unfavorable conditionse3
- Setting
- 2015e3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“A large variation in the achieved financial results was observed in 2015, in which there were particularly unfavorable conditions for the growth and yield of sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
The difference in financial results between years was smaller in the more favorable year, 2016.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise4
- Outcome
- differencee4
- Direction
- smallere4
- Qualifier
- more favorable yeare4
- Setting
- 2016e4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“In the more favorable year for growing sugar beet (2016), the difference was smaller”
Claim · model-written summary
The double and triple application of Actisil fertilizer gave the largest increase in gross and net production value of sugar beet.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise5
- Treatment
- double and triple application of Actisil fertilizere5
- Outcome
- gross and net production valuee5
- Direction
- largest increasee5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“The largest increase in the gross and net production value of sugar beet was ensured by the double and triple application of Actisil fertilizer and the triple application of the Optysil growth stimulator”
Claim · model-written summary
The triple application of the Optysil growth stimulator gave the largest increase in gross and net production value of sugar beet.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise5
- Treatment
- triple application of the Optysil growth stimulatore5
- Outcome
- gross and net production valuee5
- Direction
- largest increasee5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“The largest increase in the gross and net production value of sugar beet was ensured by the double and triple application of Actisil fertilizer and the triple application of the Optysil growth stimulator”
Claim · model-written summary
A single Optysil growth stimulator application gave the largest profitability indicator, 11.26, for sugar beet.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- single Optysil growth stimulator applicatione7
- Outcome
- profitability indicatore7
- Direction
- largeste7
- Value
- 11.26e7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“However, the largest profitability indicator (11.26) was characterized by a single Optysil growth stimulator application”
t0“PROFITABILITY OF SUGAR BEET FOLIAR NUTRITION WITH SILICON”
Claim · model-written summary
The total costs of silicon foliar application of sugar beet varied from 50 to 402 PLN/ha, depending on the number of treatments and the product applied.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- silicon foliar applicatione6
- Outcome
- total costs of silicon foliar applicatione6
- Value
- 50 to 402 PLN/hae6
- Qualifier
- depending on the number of treatments and the applied producte6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“The total costs of silicon foliar application varied depending on the number of treatments and the applied product from 50 to 402 PLN/ha”
t0“PROFITABILITY OF SUGAR BEET FOLIAR NUTRITION WITH SILICON”
The same questions in other papers
silicon atom · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →fertilization · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
236 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- negative
263 papers more in this group
See all 267 papers →micronutrient · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
10 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.