Paper · 2021 · Crop Science

Genotype‐specific nitrogen uptake dynamics and fertilizer management explain contrasting wheat protein concentration

Romulo P. Lollato; Brent R. Jaenisch; Sergio R. Silva

15
claims
33
verbatim quotes
56
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Increasing yield and grain protein concentration (GPC) in wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) without excessive nitrogen (N) rates requires increasing N use efficiency (NUE, yield per available N). We assessed the effects of N rate and timing on yield, GPC, and N nutritional indices of two winter wheat genotypes with similar yield but contrasting GPC. Factorial field experiments evaluated the wheat genotypes ‘LCS Chrome’ (high GPC) and ‘WB–Grainfield’ (low GPC), three N rates, and four N timings (‘Fall’, 100% of N rate applied at Zadoks GS20; ‘Spring’, 100% at GS25; ‘Split’, 40% Fall plus 60% Spring; and ‘Anthesis’, 40% fall, 50% spring, and 10% at GS61) in six Kansas environments. Yield ranged from 2,853 to 8,023 kg ha ‐1 and GPC from 88 to 152 g kg ‐1 . Fall and spring N timing had the lowest and greatest yield difference from the zero‐N control and showed linear, linear‐plateau or no responses to N rate. ‘LCS Chrome’ had 5 to 19 g kg ‐1 greater GPC than ‘WB–Grainfield’, which was associated with greater post‐anthesis N uptake (24 vs 15% of maturity‐N uptake), a greater spike N gain between anthesis and maturity (7.4 vs 6.5 g m ‐2 ), and greater N recovery efficiency (0.34 vs 0.28 kg kg ‐1 ). Greater N rates and Anthesis or Spring N timings increased GPC. The NUE (range: 20–311 kg kg ‐1 ) was inversely related to N availability, and Fall N timing had the lowest NUE. Our results highlighted physiological reasons for genotype‐specific GPC performance and suggested agronomic opportunities to simultaneously improve wheat yield and GPC.

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 15

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat yield ranged from 2,853 to 8,023 kg ha ‐1.

Outcome
Yielde0
Value
2,853 to 8,023 kg ha ‐1e0

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

“Yield ranged from 2,853 to 8,023 kg ha ‐1 and GPC from 88 to 152 g kg ‐1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 694–766 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain protein concentration ranged from 88 to 152 g kg ‐1.

Outcome
GPCe0
Value
88 to 152 g kg ‐1e0

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

“GPC from 88 to 152 g kg ‐1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 740–766 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fall N timing had the lowest yield difference from zero-N control.

Treatment
Falle0
Outcome
yield differencee0
Direction
loweste0
Comparator
zero‐N controle0

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

“Fall and spring N timing had the lowest and greatest yield difference from the zero‐N control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 769–862 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spring N timing had the greatest yield difference from zero-N control.

Treatment
spring N timinge0
Outcome
yield differencee0
Direction
greateste0
Comparator
zero‐N controle0

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

“Fall and spring N timing had the lowest and greatest yield difference from the zero‐N control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 769–862 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield responses to N rate included linear, linear-plateau and no-response patterns.

Outcome
responses to N ratee0

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

“showed linear, linear‐plateau or no responses to N rate”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 867–922 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LCS Chrome grain protein concentration exceeded WB–Grainfield by 5 to 19 g kg ‐1.

Material
‘LCS Chrome’e0
Outcome
GPCe0
Direction
greatere0
Value
5 to 19 g kg ‐1e0
Comparator
‘WB–Grainfield’e0

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

“‘LCS Chrome’ had 5 to 19 g kg ‐1 greater GPC than ‘WB–Grainfield’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 924–989 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LCS Chrome had greater post-anthesis N uptake, 24% versus 15% of maturity N uptake.

Material
‘LCS Chrome’e1
Outcome
post‐anthesis N uptakee0
Direction
greatere0
Value
24 vs 15% of maturity‐N uptakee0
Comparator
‘WB–Grainfield’e1

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

“greater post‐anthesis N uptake (24 vs 15% of maturity‐N uptake)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1080 · show in text ↑
e1

“‘LCS Chrome’ had 5 to 19 g kg ‐1 greater GPC than ‘WB–Grainfield’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 924–989 · show in text ↑
e2

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LCS Chrome had greater spike N gain, 7.4 versus 6.5 g m ‐2.

Material
‘LCS Chrome’e1
Outcome
spike N gaine0
Direction
greatere0
Value
7.4 vs 6.5 g m ‐2e0
Comparator
‘WB–Grainfield’e1

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

“a greater spike N gain between anthesis and maturity (7.4 vs 6.5 g m ‐2 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1082–1155 · show in text ↑
e1

“‘LCS Chrome’ had 5 to 19 g kg ‐1 greater GPC than ‘WB–Grainfield’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 924–989 · show in text ↑
e2

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

LCS Chrome had greater N recovery efficiency, 0.34 versus 0.28 kg kg ‐1.

Material
‘LCS Chrome’e1
Outcome
N recovery efficiencye0
Direction
greatere0
Value
0.34 vs 0.28 kg kg ‐1e0
Comparator
‘WB–Grainfield’e1

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

“greater N recovery efficiency (0.34 vs 0.28 kg kg ‐1 )”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1161–1215 · show in text ↑
e1

“‘LCS Chrome’ had 5 to 19 g kg ‐1 greater GPC than ‘WB–Grainfield’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 924–989 · show in text ↑
e2

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Greater N rates increased grain protein concentration.

Treatment
Greater N ratese0
Outcome
GPCe0
Direction
increasede0

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

“Greater N rates and Anthesis or Spring N timings increased GPC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1217–1279 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Anthesis N timing increased grain protein concentration.

Treatment
Anthesise0
Outcome
GPCe0
Direction
increasede0

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

“Greater N rates and Anthesis or Spring N timings increased GPC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1217–1279 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Spring N timing increased grain protein concentration.

Treatment
Spring N timingse0
Outcome
GPCe0
Direction
increasede0

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

“Greater N rates and Anthesis or Spring N timings increased GPC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1217–1279 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

N use efficiency ranged from 20 to 311 kg kg ‐1.

Outcome
NUEe0
Value
20–311 kg kg ‐1e0

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

“The NUE (range: 20–311 kg kg ‐1 ) was inversely related to N availability”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1281–1354 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

N use efficiency was inversely related to N availability.

Treatment
N availabilitye0
Outcome
NUEe0
Direction
inversely relatede0

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

“The NUE (range: 20–311 kg kg ‐1 ) was inversely related to N availability”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1281–1354 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fall N timing had the lowest N use efficiency.

Treatment
Fall N timinge0
Outcome
NUEe0
Direction
loweste0

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

“Fall N timing had the lowest NUE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1360–1392 · show in text ↑
e1

“wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 67–96 · show in text ↑

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. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

450 papers more in this group

See all 454 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.