Paper · 2019 · Applied Ecology and Environmental Research

EFFECTS OF FOLIAR UREA, POTASSIUM AND ZINC SULPHATE TREATMENTS BEFORE AND AFTER FLOWERING ON GRAIN YIELD, TECHNOLOGICAL QUALITY AND NUTRIENT CONCENTRATIONS OF WHEAT

H BARUT

8
claims
19
verbatim quotes
12
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

This study was carried out under field conditions to determine the effects of foliar urea, potassium sulphate (K2SO4) and zinc sulphate heptahydrate (ZnSO4.7H2O) treatments at vegetative and generative periods on yield, technological quality and mineral element concentrations of wheat (Triticum aestivum L. cv. Altinbasak). Experiments were conducted in two experiment groups (foliar treatments of 0% (Control); 0.5% Urea; 1% Urea; 0.5% ZnSO4.7H2O; 0.5% Urea+0.5% ZnSO4.7H2O; 1% Urea+0.5% ZnSO4.7H2O; 0.5% K2SO4 and 1% K2SO4 were performed in the first experiment and foliar 0%; 0.5% Urea+0.5% K2SO4; 0.5% Urea+1% K2SO4; 1% Urea+0.5% K2SO4; 1% Urea+1% K2SO4 were performed in the second experiment). All treatments increased yield and sedimentation values as compared to the control treatments. In the first experiment, 0.5% urea treatment was prominent for yield, nitrogen and protein and urea+ZnSO4.7H2O treatments for grain zinc and iron concentrations. In the second experiment, 1% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments were prominent for protein and grain nitrogen concentrations and 1% urea+1% K2SO4 and 0.5% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments for yield.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All foliar treatments increased wheat yield relative to controls.

Material
Altinbasake1
Treatment
All treatmentse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
control treatmentse0

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

“All treatments increased yield and sedimentation values as compared to the control treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 701–795 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L. cv. Altinbasak)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 280–323 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All foliar treatments increased wheat sedimentation values relative to controls.

Treatment
All treatmentse0
Outcome
sedimentation valuese0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
control treatmentse0

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

“All treatments increased yield and sedimentation values as compared to the control treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 701–795 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat (Triticum aestivum L. cv. Altinbasak)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 280–323 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In the first experiment, 0.5% urea was prominent for wheat yield.

Treatment
0.5% urea treatmente0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
prominente0
Qualifier
first experimente0

Not reportedComparator

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

“In the first experiment, 0.5% urea treatment was prominent for yield, nitrogen and protein”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–886 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 159–164 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In the first experiment, 0.5% urea was prominent for wheat nitrogen and protein.

Treatment
0.5% urea treatmente0
Outcome
nitrogen and proteine0
Direction
prominente0

Not reportedComparator

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

“In the first experiment, 0.5% urea treatment was prominent for yield, nitrogen and protein”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–886 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 159–164 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In the first experiment, urea plus zinc sulphate treatments were prominent for grain zinc and iron concentrations.

Treatment
urea+ZnSO4.7H2O treatmentse0
Outcome
grain zinc and iron concentrationse0
Direction
prominente1

Not reportedComparator

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

“urea+ZnSO4.7H2O treatments for grain zinc and iron concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 891–956 · show in text ↑
e1

“0.5% urea treatment was prominent for yield, nitrogen and protein and urea+ZnSO4.7H2O treatments for grain zinc and iron concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 821–956 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 159–164 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In the second experiment, 1% urea plus 0.5% potassium sulphate was prominent for wheat protein and grain nitrogen concentrations.

Treatment
1% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatmentse0
Outcome
protein and grain nitrogen concentrationse0
Direction
prominente0

Not reportedComparator

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

“1% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments were prominent for protein and grain nitrogen concentrations”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 984–1074 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 159–164 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In the second experiment, 1% urea plus 1% potassium sulphate was prominent for yield.

Treatment
1% urea+1% K2SO4e0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
prominente1

Not reportedComparator

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

“1% urea+1% K2SO4 and 0.5% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments for yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1079–1141 · show in text ↑
e1

“1% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments were prominent for protein and grain nitrogen concentrations and 1% urea+1% K2SO4 and 0.5% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments for yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 984–1141 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 159–164 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In the second experiment, 0.5% urea plus 0.5% potassium sulphate was prominent for yield.

Treatment
0.5% urea+0.5% K2SO4e0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
prominente1

Not reportedComparator

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

“1% urea+1% K2SO4 and 0.5% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments for yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1079–1141 · show in text ↑
e1

“1% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments were prominent for protein and grain nitrogen concentrations and 1% urea+1% K2SO4 and 0.5% urea+0.5% K2SO4 treatments for yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 984–1141 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 159–164 · show in text ↑

potassium sulfate · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 10 positive, 2 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

potassium sulfate · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

nitrogen · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

454 papers: 400 positive, 54 negative or no effect

399 papers in the same direction as this paper · 47 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

450 papers more in this group

See all 454 papers →

nitrogen · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

479 papers: 410 positive, 69 negative or no effect

409 papers in the same direction as this paper · 64 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

475 papers more in this group

See all 479 papers →

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

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

1,736 papers in the same direction as this paper · 285 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  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.