Abstract
The aim was to investigate the effect of silicon fertilizer with straw return in phosphorus efficiency and maize grain yield. In 2018 and 2019, two field experiments were established in Nong’an County, Jilin province China. Four treatments were arranged in a randomized block design: S+ Si1 (straw return + Silicon), S-Si1 (no straw return + Si), S+ Si0 (straw return + no Silicon) and S-Si0 (no straw return + no Silicon). The total uptake of phosphorus under the S+ Si1 increased by 22.9% compared to that under the S-Si0. Compared to S-Si0, the average recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity for S-Si1 increased by 16.7%, 34.7%, and 4.8%, respectively. The average of the recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity in S+ Si1 was 26.6%,44.6%, and 6.3% higher than that in S-Si0, respectively. The straw and grain yield were significantly higher under the S-Si1, which increased by 10.6% and 4.8% respectively than that S-Si0, and S+ Si1 significantly outperformed S-Si0 by 17.3% and 6.3% for straw and grain yield, respectively. Our results indicate that the application of silicon fertilizer with straw return improves soil available phosphorus, plant uptake, phosphorus efficiency to meet crop requirements, and increasing crop productivity.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
S+ Si1 increased total phosphorus uptake by 22.9% versus S-Si0.
- Treatment
- S+ Si1e0
- Outcome
- total uptake of phosphoruse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 22.9%e0
- Comparator
- S-Si0e0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The total uptake of phosphorus under the S+ Si1 increased by 22.9% compared to that under the S-Si0.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S-Si1 increased recovery phosphorus efficiency by 16.7% versus S-Si0.
- Treatment
- S-Si1e0
- Outcome
- recovery phosphorus efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 16.7%e0
- Comparator
- S-Si0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to S-Si0, the average recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity for S-Si1 increased by 16.7%, 34.7%, and 4.8%, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S-Si1 increased agronomic phosphorus efficiency by 34.7% versus S-Si0.
- Treatment
- S-Si1e0
- Outcome
- agronomic phosphorus efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 34.7%e0
- Comparator
- S-Si0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to S-Si0, the average recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity for S-Si1 increased by 16.7%, 34.7%, and 4.8%, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S-Si1 increased partial factor productivity by 4.8% versus S-Si0.
- Treatment
- S-Si1e0
- Outcome
- partial factor productivitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.8%e0
- Comparator
- S-Si0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to S-Si0, the average recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity for S-Si1 increased by 16.7%, 34.7%, and 4.8%, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S+ Si1 increased recovery phosphorus efficiency by 26.6% versus S-Si0.
- Treatment
- S+ Si1e0
- Outcome
- recovery phosphorus efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 26.6%e0
- Comparator
- S-Si0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average of the recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity in S+ Si1 was 26.6%,44.6%, and 6.3% higher than that in S-Si0, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S+ Si1 increased agronomic phosphorus efficiency by 44.6% versus S-Si0.
- Treatment
- S+ Si1e0
- Outcome
- agronomic phosphorus efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 44.6%e0
- Comparator
- S-Si0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average of the recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity in S+ Si1 was 26.6%,44.6%, and 6.3% higher than that in S-Si0, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S+ Si1 increased partial factor productivity by 6.3% versus S-Si0.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The average of the recovery phosphorus efficiency, agronomic phosphorus efficiency, and partial factor productivity in S+ Si1 was 26.6%,44.6%, and 6.3% higher than that in S-Si0, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S-Si1 increased straw by 10.6% versus S-Si0.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The straw and grain yield were significantly higher under the S-Si1, which increased by 10.6% and 4.8% respectively than that S-Si0, and S+ Si1 significantly outperformed S-Si0 by 17.3% and 6.3% for straw and grain yield, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S-Si1 increased grain yield by 4.8% versus S-Si0.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The straw and grain yield were significantly higher under the S-Si1, which increased by 10.6% and 4.8% respectively than that S-Si0, and S+ Si1 significantly outperformed S-Si0 by 17.3% and 6.3% for straw and grain yield, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S+ Si1 increased straw by 17.3% versus S-Si0.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The straw and grain yield were significantly higher under the S-Si1, which increased by 10.6% and 4.8% respectively than that S-Si0, and S+ Si1 significantly outperformed S-Si0 by 17.3% and 6.3% for straw and grain yield, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
S+ Si1 increased grain yield by 6.3% versus S-Si0.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The straw and grain yield were significantly higher under the S-Si1, which increased by 10.6% and 4.8% respectively than that S-Si0, and S+ Si1 significantly outperformed S-Si0 by 17.3% and 6.3% for straw and grain yield, respectively.”
t0“Maize Yield”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude that silicon fertilizer with straw return improves soil available phosphorus.
- Treatment
- application of silicon fertilizer with straw returne0
- Outcome
- soil available phosphoruse0
- Direction
- improvese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Our results indicate that the application of silicon fertilizer with straw return improves soil available phosphorus, plant uptake, phosphorus efficiency to meet crop requirements, and increasing crop productivity.”
t0“Maize Yield”
The same questions in other papers
silicon atom · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
organic · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
72 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
74 papers more in this group
See all 78 papers →fertilization · soil: chemistry · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
302 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
335 papers more in this group
See all 339 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.