Abstract
Abstract Sugar beet ( Beta vulgaris L.) accounts for 55% of the total sugar production in the United States. Optimizing fertilizer nitrogen (N) management is pivotal for its economical and sustainable production and is challenging. Three‐year field experiments (2020–2022) were conducted in western Nebraska to evaluate the effects of fertilizer N rates on beet root yield, sugar concentration, sugar loss to molasses (SLM), estimated recoverable sugar (ERS), and nitrogen use efficiency (NUE). Treatments included 0%, 50%, 80%, 100%, and 125% of recommended N based on the current University of Nebraska‐Lincoln recommendation. Fertilizer application increased the root yield, ERS, and SLM but decreased sugar concentration in most cases compared to the control treatment. Beet NUE decreased with increasing total available N. Linear‐plateau regression models fitted to root yield and ERS response curves showed that the agronomic optimum N rates (AONRs) were 179 and 166 kg N ha −1 for root yield of 68.86 Mg ha −1 and ERS of 11.95 Mg ha −1 , respectively. The findings showed that the root yield‐based model required 35% less N rate than the current UNL beet N algorithm, and the ERS‐based model required 13 kg N ha −1 less N rate than the root yield‐based model. Because of the trade‐off effect of total available N on root yield and quality, the ERS‐based N recommendation can be a potential strategy to optimize N management for economic and environmentally sustainable sugar beet production.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer increased beet root yield relative to control in most cases.
- Taxon
- Sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- Fertilizer applicatione0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- in most casese0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilizer application increased the root yield, ERS, and SLM but decreased sugar concentration in most cases compared to the control treatment”
t0“Sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer increased estimated recoverable sugar relative to control in most cases.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Fertilizer applicatione0
- Outcome
- ERSe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- in most casese0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilizer application increased the root yield, ERS, and SLM but decreased sugar concentration in most cases compared to the control treatment”
t0“Sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer increased sugar loss to molasses relative to control in most cases.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Fertilizer applicatione0
- Outcome
- SLMe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- in most casese0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilizer application increased the root yield, ERS, and SLM but decreased sugar concentration in most cases compared to the control treatment”
t0“Sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer decreased beet sugar concentration relative to control in most cases.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Fertilizer applicatione0
- Outcome
- sugar concentratione0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- in most casese0
- Comparator
- control treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilizer application increased the root yield, ERS, and SLM but decreased sugar concentration in most cases compared to the control treatment”
t0“Sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Beet nitrogen use efficiency declined as total available nitrogen increased.
- Taxon
- Beet
Beta vulgarise0 - Treatment
- total available Ne0
- Outcome
- NUEe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Beet NUE decreased with increasing total available N”
Claim · model-written summary
The root-yield optimum nitrogen rate was 179 kg N ha −1 at 68.86 Mg ha −1 root yield.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Value
- 179e0
- Qualifier
- 68.86 Mg ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the agronomic optimum N rates (AONRs) were 179 and 166 kg N ha −1 for root yield of 68.86 Mg ha −1 and ERS of 11.95 Mg ha −1 , respectively”
t0“Sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
The ERS optimum nitrogen rate was 166 kg N ha −1 at 11.95 Mg ha −1 ERS.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- ERSe0
- Value
- 166 kg N ha −1e0
- Qualifier
- 11.95 Mg ha −1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the agronomic optimum N rates (AONRs) were 179 and 166 kg N ha −1 for root yield of 68.86 Mg ha −1 and ERS of 11.95 Mg ha −1 , respectively”
t0“Sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
The root-yield model required 35% less nitrogen than the current UNL algorithm.
- Taxon
- beetBeta vulgarise0
- Outcome
- N ratee0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 35%e0
- Comparator
- current UNL beet N algorithme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the root yield‐based model required 35% less N rate than the current UNL beet N algorithm”
Claim · model-written summary
The ERS model required 13 kg N ha −1 less nitrogen than the root-yield model.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- N ratee0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 13 kg N ha −1e0
- Comparator
- root yield‐based modele0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the ERS‐based model required 13 kg N ha −1 less N rate than the root yield‐based model”
t0“Sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors propose the ERS-based nitrogen recommendation for sustainable sugar beet production.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- ERS‐based N recommendatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the ERS‐based N recommendation can be a potential strategy to optimize N management for economic and environmentally sustainable sugar beet production”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · quality: sugar starch · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results differ
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 88 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
101 papers more in this group
See all 105 papers →fertilization · molecular: metabolites · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 45 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
64 papers more in this group
See all 68 papers →fertilization · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
236 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
263 papers more in this group
See all 267 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.