Paper · 2021 · Sustainability

Interactive Effects of Organic Fertilizers and Drought Stress on Growth and Nutrient Content of Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage

Addisie Geremew; Laura Carson; Selamawit Woldesenbet; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
17
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

With the ongoing climate change scenario and alarmingly increased land degradation, understanding complex interactions of drought stress and organic fertilizers on morpho-physiological traits and dynamics of nutrient concentration is pivotal for sustainable production leafy vegetables such as mustard (Brassica juncea). Thus, this study evaluated the effect of drought stress and organic fertilizers on B. juncea growth, physiology, and dynamics of nutrient concentration at the vegetative stage. The plants were exposed to three water stress levels (well-watered (100% field capacity, FC), mild (50% FC), and severe (25% FC) supplemented with three organic fertilizers (chitosan, ultra green, and home-grown natural vegetable foods) either individually or in combination during the vegetative growth stage. Water stress had a negative effect on growth and physiological traits, and macro- and micronutrients of mustard. However, the ameliorative effects of fertilizer application were revealed by improved plant height, leaf area, relative water content, membrane stability index, and chlorophyll content from 9.7% to 26.9%, 28% to 32.72%, 7.97% to 39.51%, 7.93% to 39.66%, and 29.68% to 56.53%, respectively. Analysis of variance revealed a significant effect of soil moisture level, fertilizer type and their interaction on content of macronutrients (Ca, K, P, N, C, S, Na, Mg) and micronutrients (Fe, Zn) in mustard leaves. However, there was no significant effect detected for Cu across all factors as well the interaction effect on Mn. Overall, our results indicated that application of organic fertilizers enables mustard plant to withstand the deleterious effect of drought stress, resulting in improved growth and physiological traits as well as leaf nutrient content.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water stress had a negative effect on growth and physiological traits of mustard.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Treatment
Water stresse1
Outcome
growth and physiological traitse1
Direction
negative effecte1
Qualifier
macro- and micronutrients of mustarde1

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e1

“Water stress had a negative effect on growth and physiological traits, and macro- and micronutrients of mustard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 809–920 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer application improved plant height of mustard by 9.7% to 26.9%.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Treatment
fertilizer applicatione2
Outcome
plant heighte2
Direction
improvede2
Value
9.7% to 26.9%e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e2

“the ameliorative effects of fertilizer application were revealed by improved plant height, leaf area, relative water content, membrane stability index, and chlorophyll content from 9.7% to 26.9%, 28% to 32.72%, 7.97% to 39.51%, 7.93% to 39.66%, and 29.68% to 56.53%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1196 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer application improved leaf area of mustard by 28% to 32.72%.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Treatment
fertilizer applicatione2
Outcome
leaf areae2
Direction
improvede2
Value
28% to 32.72%e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e2

“the ameliorative effects of fertilizer application were revealed by improved plant height, leaf area, relative water content, membrane stability index, and chlorophyll content from 9.7% to 26.9%, 28% to 32.72%, 7.97% to 39.51%, 7.93% to 39.66%, and 29.68% to 56.53%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1196 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer application improved relative water content of mustard by 7.97% to 39.51%.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Treatment
fertilizer applicatione2
Outcome
relative water contente2
Direction
improvede2
Value
7.97% to 39.51%e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e2

“the ameliorative effects of fertilizer application were revealed by improved plant height, leaf area, relative water content, membrane stability index, and chlorophyll content from 9.7% to 26.9%, 28% to 32.72%, 7.97% to 39.51%, 7.93% to 39.66%, and 29.68% to 56.53%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1196 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer application improved membrane stability index of mustard by 7.93% to 39.66%.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Treatment
fertilizer applicatione2
Outcome
membrane stability indexe2
Direction
improvede2
Value
7.93% to 39.66%e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e2

“the ameliorative effects of fertilizer application were revealed by improved plant height, leaf area, relative water content, membrane stability index, and chlorophyll content from 9.7% to 26.9%, 28% to 32.72%, 7.97% to 39.51%, 7.93% to 39.66%, and 29.68% to 56.53%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1196 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer application improved chlorophyll content of mustard by 29.68% to 56.53%.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Treatment
fertilizer applicatione2
Outcome
chlorophyll contente2
Direction
improvede2
Value
29.68% to 56.53%e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e2

“the ameliorative effects of fertilizer application were revealed by improved plant height, leaf area, relative water content, membrane stability index, and chlorophyll content from 9.7% to 26.9%, 28% to 32.72%, 7.97% to 39.51%, 7.93% to 39.66%, and 29.68% to 56.53%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1196 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil moisture level, fertilizer type and their interaction had a significant effect on macronutrient content in mustard leaves.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Treatment
soil moisture level, fertilizer type and their interactione3
Outcome
content of macronutrientse3
Qualifier
micronutrients (Fe, Zn) in mustard leavese3

Not reportedDirection

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e3

“Analysis of variance revealed a significant effect of soil moisture level, fertilizer type and their interaction on content of macronutrients (Ca, K, P, N, C, S, Na, Mg) and micronutrients (Fe, Zn) in mustard leaves”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1212–1427 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No significant effect of the treatments was detected for leaf Cu or for the interaction effect on Mn.

Taxon
Brassica junceaBrassica junceat0
Outcome
Cue4
Qualifier
across all factors as well the interaction effect on Mne4

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

Brassica juncea
Brassica juncea · TaxonDalgial · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Brassica juncea at Vegetative Stage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 96–131 · show in text ↑
e4

“there was no significant effect detected for Cu across all factors as well the interaction effect on Mn”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1438–1541 · show in text ↑

drought · growth · Brassica juncea (Indian mustard)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 1 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

fertilization · growth · Brassica juncea (Indian mustard)Positive and negative results

73 papers: 66 positive, 7 negative or no effect

65 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

69 papers more in this group

See all 73 papers →

fertilization · physiology: water · Brassica juncea (Indian mustard)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

fertilization · physiology: pigments · Brassica juncea (Indian mustard)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.