Paper · 2019 · Revista Colombiana de Ciencias Hortícolas

Salt water and silicon application on growth, chloroplastid pigments, chlorophyll fluorescence and beet production

José Sebastião de Melo-Filho; Toshik Iarley da Silva; Anderson Carlos De Melo Gonçalves; et al.

10
claims
20
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

In recent years, the use of saline water in agriculture has become an alternative mainly because of water scarcity. However, plants do not tolerate high salt contents; so, the use of salt stress attenuators could enable saline water usage in agriculture. This study aimed to assess the effect of saline water and silicon applications on growth, chloroplastid pigments, chlorophyll fluorescence a and beet production. The experiment was conducted with complete randomized blocks in a 5 x 5 combined factorial arrangement according to the Central Composite of Box experiment matrix for the electrical conductivity in the irrigation water (ECw) and silicon doses (Si), with minimum (- α) and maximum (α) values from 0.5 to 6.0 dS m-1 and from 0.00 to 18.16 mL L-1, totaling nine treatments, with four replicates and three plants per plot. The irrigation water ECw increase reduced growth and beet production, but the chlorophyll contents, biomass and fluorescence production were not affected by salinity. Silicon applications via the soil increased growth and chlorophyll fluorescence a but did not reduce the harmful effect of the salt stress. The irrigation water ECw above 0.50 dS m-1 negatively affected the beet crop. The silicon dose of 9.08 mL L-1 is the most recommended application.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Higher irrigation water conductivity reduced beet growth.

Treatment
irrigation water ECw increasee0
Outcome
growthe0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation water ECw increase reduced growth and beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–904 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Higher irrigation water conductivity reduced beet production.

Treatment
irrigation water ECw increasee0
Outcome
beet productione0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation water ECw increase reduced growth and beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 840–904 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity did not affect chlorophyll contents.

Treatment
salinitye0
Outcome
chlorophyll contentse0
Direction
not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“chlorophyll contents, biomass and fluorescence production were not affected by salinity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 914–1001 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity did not affect biomass.

Treatment
salinitye0
Outcome
biomasse0
Direction
not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“chlorophyll contents, biomass and fluorescence production were not affected by salinity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 914–1001 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Salinity did not affect fluorescence production.

Treatment
salinitye0
Outcome
fluorescence productione0
Direction
not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“chlorophyll contents, biomass and fluorescence production were not affected by salinity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 914–1001 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil silicon application increased beet growth.

Treatment
Silicon applications via the soile0
Outcome
growthe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Silicon applications via the soil increased growth and chlorophyll fluorescence a”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1003–1084 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil silicon application increased chlorophyll fluorescence a.

Treatment
Silicon applications via the soile0
Outcome
chlorophyll fluorescence ae0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Silicon applications via the soil increased growth and chlorophyll fluorescence a”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1003–1084 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Silicon did not reduce salt stress harm.

Treatment
Silicone1
Outcome
harmful effect of the salt stresse0
Direction
did not reducee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“did not reduce the harmful effect of the salt stress”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1141 · show in text ↑
e1

“Silicon applications via the soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1003–1036 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation water ECw above 0.50 dS m-1 harmed beet crop.

Treatment
irrigation water ECw above 0.50 dS m-1e0
Outcome
beet crope0
Direction
negatively affectede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation water ECw above 0.50 dS m-1 negatively affected the beet crop”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1147–1219 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Authors recommend silicon at 9.08 mL L-1.

Outcome
silicon dose of 9.08 mL L-1e0

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

Beta vulgaris
Beta vulgaris · TaxonMichael Bakker Paiva · CC BY 4.0 · iNaturalist ↗

Verbatim

e0

“silicon dose of 9.08 mL L-1 is the most recommended application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1225–1288 · show in text ↑
t0

“beet production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 99–114 · show in text ↑

silicon atom · physiology: photosynthesis · Beta vulgaris (beet)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 →

silicon atom · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

salinity · physiology: pigments · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results differ

6 papers: 1 positive, 5 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

salinity · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results differ

54 papers: 13 positive, 41 negative or no effect

40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

50 papers more in this group

See all 54 papers →

irrigation · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results differ

113 papers: 79 positive, 34 negative or no effect

33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 79 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

109 papers more in this group

See all 113 papers →

irrigation · organism · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

salinity · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 4 positive, 13 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

irrigation · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

51 papers: 34 positive, 17 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

47 papers more in this group

See all 51 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.