Paper · 2021 · BIO Web of Conferences

Fertilizer circulation and nitrogen balance in the agrophytocenosis of sugar beet when acidizing typical chernozem (study with15n)

A.S. Avilov; N.Ya. Shmyreva; A.A. Zavalin; et al.

14
claims
27
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The studies were carried out under the conditions of a microfield experiment on typical chernozem (Belgorod region) with two soils (pH 5.0 and 6.5) with the addition of urea (enriched in 15 N, 17.1 at. %) And effluents from a pig-breeding complex (PSC) at doses of 6 and 12 g N/m 2 (against the background of phosphate and potash fertilizers, P 6 K 6 ). The largest amount of nitrogen was consumed by sugar beets with the combined introduction of CCA and urea (25.8 g N/m 2 ). When the soil was acidified to pHsalt 5.0, the consumption of nitrogen in mineral fertilizers decreased by 15-18%, soil ni-trogen – by 21-52%, and waste nitrogen – by 16%. At the same time, the immobilization of nitrogen in the fertilizer decreased by 13-18%, and the loss of gaseous nitrogen compounds increased by 47-108%. The effluent from the pig-breeding complex increased the immobilization of nitrogen in mineral fertilizers (by 38-46%) and reduced gaseous nitrogen losses (by 22-44%). The highest stability and productivity (root crop yield 1654 g/m 2 , tops yield 239 g/m2) was exhibited by agrophytocenosis on soil with pH 6.5 with the combined application of CCA and urea. When the soil solution was acid-ified to pH 5.0, the yield of beet root crops decreased by 30% and the yield of tops – by 24%. On soil with pH 5.0, fertilizers increased the sugar content in root crops by 0.2-1.3%, on soil with pH 6.5, they decreased by 1.3-2.0%.

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 14

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined CCA and urea gave the greatest nitrogen consumption by sugar beets, 25.8 g N/m 2.

Treatment
combined introduction of CCA and ureae0
Outcome
nitrogene0
Direction
largeste0
Value
25.8 g N/m 2e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The largest amount of nitrogen was consumed by sugar beets with the combined introduction of CCA and urea (25.8 g N/m 2 ).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 354–476 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil acidification reduced sugar beet consumption of mineral fertilizer nitrogen by 15-18%.

Treatment
soil was acidified to pHsalt 5.0e0
Outcome
consumption of nitrogen in mineral fertilizerse0
Direction
decreasede0
Value
15-18%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“When the soil was acidified to pHsalt 5.0, the consumption of nitrogen in mineral fertilizers decreased by 15-18%, soil ni-trogen – by 21-52%, and waste nitrogen – by 16%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 477–648 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil acidification reduced sugar beet consumption of soil nitrogen by 21-52%.

Outcome
soil ni-trogene0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
21-52%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“soil ni-trogen – by 21-52%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 592–618 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil acidification reduced sugar beet consumption of waste nitrogen by 16%.

Outcome
waste nitrogene0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
16%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“waste nitrogen – by 16%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 624–647 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Acidification reduced fertilizer nitrogen immobilization by 13-18%.

Outcome
immobilization of nitrogen in the fertilizere0
Direction
decreasede0
Value
13-18%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the immobilization of nitrogen in the fertilizer decreased by 13-18%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–735 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Acidification increased gaseous nitrogen losses by 47-108%.

Outcome
loss of gaseous nitrogen compoundse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
47-108%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the loss of gaseous nitrogen compounds increased by 47-108%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–800 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pig-complex effluent increased mineral fertilizer nitrogen immobilization by 38-46%.

Treatment
effluent from the pig-breeding complexe0
Outcome
immobilization of nitrogen in mineral fertilizerse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
38-46%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The effluent from the pig-breeding complex increased the immobilization of nitrogen in mineral fertilizers (by 38-46%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 802–920 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pig-complex effluent reduced gaseous nitrogen losses by 22-44%.

Outcome
gaseous nitrogen lossese0
Direction
reducede0
Value
22-44%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“reduced gaseous nitrogen losses (by 22-44%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 925–968 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined CCA and urea at pH 6.5 gave the highest root crop yield, 1654 g/m 2.

Treatment
combined application of CCA and ureae0
Outcome
root crop yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
1654 g/m 2e0
Setting
soil with pH 6.5e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest stability and productivity (root crop yield 1654 g/m 2 , tops yield 239 g/m2) was exhibited by agrophytocenosis on soil with pH 6.5 with the combined application of CCA and urea.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1160 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined CCA and urea at pH 6.5 gave tops yield of 239 g/m2.

Treatment
combined application of CCA and ureae0
Outcome
tops yielde0
Direction
higheste0
Value
239 g/m2e0
Setting
soil with pH 6.5e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The highest stability and productivity (root crop yield 1654 g/m 2 , tops yield 239 g/m2) was exhibited by agrophytocenosis on soil with pH 6.5 with the combined application of CCA and urea.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1160 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil acidification to pH 5.0 decreased beet root yield by 30%.

Treatment
soil solution was acid-ified to pH 5.0e0
Outcome
yield of beet root cropse0
Direction
decreasede0
Value
30%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“When the soil solution was acid-ified to pH 5.0, the yield of beet root crops decreased by 30%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1161–1255 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil acidification to pH 5.0 decreased tops yield by 24%.

Outcome
yield of topse0
Direction
decreaseinferrede0
Value
24%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the yield of tops – by 24%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1260–1286 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizers increased root crop sugar content by 0.2-1.3% at pH 5.0.

Treatment
fertilizerse0
Outcome
sugar content in root cropse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.2-1.3%e0
Setting
soil with pH 5.0e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“On soil with pH 5.0, fertilizers increased the sugar content in root crops by 0.2-1.3%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1288–1374 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizers decreased root crop sugar content by 1.3-2.0% at pH 6.5.

Direction
decreasede0
Value
1.3-2.0%e0
Setting
soil with pH 6.5e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparatorOutcome

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

Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris · TaxonQuadell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“on soil with pH 6.5, they decreased by 1.3-2.0%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1376–1423 · show in text ↑
t0

“sugar beet”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 71–81 · show in text ↑

fertilization · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results differ

105 papers: 88 positive, 17 negative or no effect

87 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

101 papers more in this group

See all 105 papers →

nitrogen · nutrient: content · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results

31 papers: 23 positive, 8 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

27 papers more in this group

See all 31 papers →

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

161 papers: 142 positive, 19 negative or no effect

141 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

157 papers more in this group

See all 161 papers →

ph · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 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.