Abstract
Waterlogging increasingly challenges crop production, affecting 10% of global arable land, necessitating the development of pragmatic strategies for mitigating the downside risk of yield penalty. Here, we conducted experiments under controlled (tank) and field conditions to evaluate the efficacy of nitrogenous fertiliser in alleviating waterlogging stress. Without intervention, we found that waterlogging reduced grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass, but had a de minimus impact on grain number per spike and increased grain weight. Soil fertiliser mitigated waterlogging damage, enhancing yields via increased spike numbers, with crop recovery post-waterlogging catalysed via improved tiller numbers, plant height and canopy greenness. Foliar nitrogen spray has little impact on crop recovery, possibly due to stomatal closure, while modest urea application during and after waterlogging yielded similar results to greater N application at the end of waterlogging. Waterlogging-tolerant genotypes (P-17 and P-52) showed superior growth and recovery during and after waterlogging compared to the waterlogging-sensitive genotypes (Planet and P-79). A comparison of fertiliser timing revealed that field fertilizer treatment two (F2: 90 kg·ha−1 at 28 DWL, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) yielded the highest and fertilizer treatment three (F3: 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) recovered the lowest yield and spike number, while fertilizer treatment one (F1: 45 kg·ha−1 at 28 DWL, 45 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) and four (F4: 90 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) had the highest shoot biomass in the field. Treatment five (T5: 180 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 30 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 90 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) presented the most favourable results in the tank. Our results provide rigorous evidence that long periods of waterlogging caused significant yield penalty, mainly due to decreased spike numbers. We contend that increasing fertiliser rates during waterlogging up to 90 kg·ha−1 can provoke crop growth and mitigate waterlogging-induced grain yield losses, and is more beneficial than applying nitrogen post-waterlogging.
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging reduced barley grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass compared with no intervention.
- Taxon
- Barley
.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgaret0 - Treatment
- waterlogginge1
- Outcome
- grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomasse1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Comparator
- Without interventione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e1“Without intervention, we found that waterlogging reduced grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass, but had a de minimus impact on grain number per spike and increased grain weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging had a de minimus impact on barley grain number per spike.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- waterlogginge1
- Outcome
- grain number per spikee1
- Direction
- de minimus impacte1
- Comparator
- Without interventione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e1“Without intervention, we found that waterlogging reduced grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass, but had a de minimus impact on grain number per spike and increased grain weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging increased barley grain weight compared with no intervention.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- waterlogginge1
- Outcome
- grain weighte1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- Without interventione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e1“Without intervention, we found that waterlogging reduced grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass, but had a de minimus impact on grain number per spike and increased grain weight”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil fertiliser enhanced barley yields under waterlogging.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Soil fertilisere2
- Outcome
- yieldse2
- Direction
- enhancinge2
- Comparator
- Without interventione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e1“Without intervention, we found that waterlogging reduced grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass, but had a de minimus impact on grain number per spike and increased grain weight”
e2“Soil fertiliser mitigated waterlogging damage, enhancing yields via increased spike numbers”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil fertiliser increased barley spike numbers under waterlogging.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Soil fertilisere2
- Outcome
- spike numberse2
- Direction
- increasede2
- Comparator
- Without interventione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e1“Without intervention, we found that waterlogging reduced grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass, but had a de minimus impact on grain number per spike and increased grain weight”
e2“Soil fertiliser mitigated waterlogging damage, enhancing yields via increased spike numbers”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil fertiliser improved tiller numbers, plant height and canopy greenness in barley during recovery after waterlogging.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Soil fertilisere2
- Outcome
- tiller numbers, plant height and canopy greennesse3
- Direction
- improvede3
- Comparator
- Without interventione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e1“Without intervention, we found that waterlogging reduced grain yields, spike numbers and shoot biomass, but had a de minimus impact on grain number per spike and increased grain weight”
e2“Soil fertiliser mitigated waterlogging damage, enhancing yields via increased spike numbers”
e3“crop recovery post-waterlogging catalysed via improved tiller numbers, plant height and canopy greenness”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nitrogen spray had little impact on barley crop recovery.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- Foliar nitrogen spraye4
- Outcome
- crop recoverye4
- Direction
- little impacte4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e4“Foliar nitrogen spray has little impact on crop recovery”
Claim · model-written summary
Modest urea application during and after waterlogging gave yields similar to greater N application at the end of waterlogging.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- modest urea application during and after waterlogginge5
- Outcome
- yielde5
- Direction
- similare5
- Comparator
- greater N application at the end of waterlogginge5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e5“modest urea application during and after waterlogging yielded similar results to greater N application at the end of waterlogging”
Claim · model-written summary
Waterlogging-tolerant barley genotypes P-17 and P-52 showed superior growth and recovery compared with sensitive genotypes Planet and P-79.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Material
- P-17 and P-52e6
- Treatment
- waterlogginge6
- Outcome
- growth and recoverye6
- Direction
- superiore6
- Comparator
- Planet and P-79e6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e6“Waterlogging-tolerant genotypes (P-17 and P-52) showed superior growth and recovery during and after waterlogging compared to the waterlogging-sensitive genotypes (Planet and P-79)”
Claim · model-written summary
Field fertilizer treatment two gave the highest barley yield.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- field fertilizer treatment twoe7
- Outcome
- yielde7
- Direction
- higheste7
- Setting
- fielde7
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e7“field fertilizer treatment two (F2: 90 kg·ha−1 at 28 DWL, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) yielded the highest”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer treatment three recovered the lowest barley yield and spike number.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- fertilizer treatment threee2
- Outcome
- yield and spike numbere2
- Direction
- loweste2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e2“fertilizer treatment three (F3: 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) recovered the lowest yield and spike number”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer treatment one gave the highest barley shoot biomass in the field.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- fertilizer treatment onee2
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse2
- Direction
- higheste2
- Setting
- in the fielde2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e2“fertilizer treatment one (F1: 45 kg·ha−1 at 28 DWL, 45 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) and four (F4: 90 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) had the highest shoot biomass in the field”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer treatment four gave the highest barley shoot biomass in the field.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- F4e2
- Outcome
- shoot biomasse2
- Direction
- higheste2
- Setting
- in the fielde2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e2“fertilizer treatment one (F1: 45 kg·ha−1 at 28 DWL, 45 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) and four (F4: 90 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 45 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 45 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) had the highest shoot biomass in the field”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatment five gave the most favourable barley results in the tank.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- T5e2
- Outcome
- resultse2
- Direction
- most favourablee2
- Setting
- in the tanke2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e2“Treatment five (T5: 180 kg·ha−1 at 0 DR, 30 kg·ha−1 at sowing and 90 kg·ha−1 at 30 DR) presented the most favourable results in the tank”
Claim · model-written summary
Long periods of waterlogging caused a significant barley yield penalty, mainly due to decreased spike numbers.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- long periods of waterlogginge2
- Outcome
- yield penaltye2
- Qualifier
- mainly due to decreased spike numberse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e2“long periods of waterlogging caused significant yield penalty, mainly due to decreased spike numbers”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend increasing fertiliser rates during waterlogging up to 90 kg·ha−1 to mitigate waterlogging-induced barley grain yield losses.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Treatment
- increasing fertiliser rates during waterlogging up to 90 kg·ha−1e2
- Outcome
- mitigate waterlogging-induced grain yield lossese2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e2“increasing fertiliser rates during waterlogging up to 90 kg·ha−1 can provoke crop growth and mitigate waterlogging-induced grain yield losses”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors state that increasing fertiliser rates during waterlogging is more beneficial for barley than applying nitrogen after waterlogging.
- Taxon
- BarleyHordeum vulgaret0
- Outcome
- more beneficiale2
- Comparator
- applying nitrogen post-waterlogginge2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Barley”
e2“is more beneficial than applying nitrogen post-waterlogging”
The same questions in other papers
flooding · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results differ
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →flooding · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Results differ
23 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →fertilization · physiology: pigments · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →nitrogen · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
46 papers in the same direction as this paper · 252 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- positive
295 papers more in this group
See all 299 papers →fertilization · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
472 papers in the same direction as this paper · 66 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
546 papers more in this group
See all 550 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.