Paper · 2024 · Agriculture

Foliar Fertilization Improves the Nitrogen Nutrition of Sugarcane

Joel José de Andrade; Emídio Cantídio Almeida de Oliveira; Amanda Michele dos Santos Lima; et al.

9
claims
17
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Increasing the recovery of N fertilizer (RNf) is the main challenge in managing nitrogen fertilization in sugarcane. This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of complementary foliar fertilization in managing nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane. Four fertilization managements, combining soil (5.0 and 4.5 g plot−1 of N) and foliar (1.0 and 1.5 g plot−1 of N) fertilization in up to two application events (0.5 + 0.5 and 0.75 + 0.75 g plot−1 of N), were compared with conventional fertilization (6.0 g plot−1 of N in soil). The change from 6.0 g plot−1 to 4.5 g plot−1 of N reduced the RNf by 46% before the first foliar fertilization. The RNf (26%) was similar between managements after the first foliar fertilization. After the second foliar fertilization, the RNf was 38% higher than that for conventional management. The accumulation of N in the aerial part of sugarcane was similar between managements until the first foliar fertilization. After the second foliar fertilization, the accumulation of N increased by 3.5% with foliar fertilization. The biomass accumulated by the managements was similar before and after the first and second foliar fertilization. The splitting of foliar fertilization increased the accumulation of N and RNf by 22% and 24%, respectively. The fertilization management with 4.5 g plot−1 of N applied to the soil, with two applications of 0.75 g plot−1 of N on the leaf, obtained greater accumulations of N and RNf. Foliar fertilization increases the efficiency of fertilization and improves the N nutrition of sugarcane.

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 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reducing soil N from 6.0 to 4.5 g per plot lowered fertilizer N recovery by 46% before foliar fertilization.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
4.5 g plot−1 of Ne0
Outcome
RNfe0
Direction
reducede0
Value
46%e0
Comparator
6.0 g plot−1e0

Verbatim

e0

“The change from 6.0 g plot−1 to 4.5 g plot−1 of N reduced the RNf by 46% before the first foliar fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 522–632 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizer N recovery was similar across managements after the first foliar application, at 26%.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Outcome
RNfe0
Direction
similare0
Value
26%e0
Qualifier
after the first foliar fertilizatione0

Verbatim

e0

“The RNf (26%) was similar between managements after the first foliar fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 634–716 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

After the second foliar application, fertilizer N recovery was 38% higher than conventional management.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
second foliar fertilizatione0
Outcome
RNfe0
Direction
highere0
Value
38%e0
Comparator
conventional managemente0

Verbatim

e0

“After the second foliar fertilization, the RNf was 38% higher than that for conventional management”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–817 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane aerial-part N accumulation was similar across managements until the first foliar application.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Organ / stage
aerial parte0
Outcome
accumulation of Ne0
Direction
similare0

Verbatim

e0

“The accumulation of N in the aerial part of sugarcane was similar between managements until the first foliar fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 819–941 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

After the second foliar application, sugarcane N accumulation increased 3.5% with foliar fertilization.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
foliar fertilizatione0
Outcome
accumulation of Ne0
Direction
increasede0
Value
3.5%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“After the second foliar fertilization, the accumulation of N increased by 3.5% with foliar fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 943–1047 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biomass accumulation was similar across fertilization schedules at all reported time points.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Outcome
biomass accumulatede0
Direction
similare0

Verbatim

e0

“The biomass accumulated by the managements was similar before and after the first and second foliar fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1049–1162 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Splitting foliar fertilization increased N accumulation by 22%.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
splitting of foliar fertilizatione0
Outcome
accumulation of Ne0
Direction
increasede0
Value
22%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The splitting of foliar fertilization increased the accumulation of N and RNf by 22% and 24%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1164–1270 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Splitting foliar fertilization increased fertilizer N recovery by 24%.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
splitting of foliar fertilizatione0
Outcome
RNfe0
Direction
increasede0
Value
24%e0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The splitting of foliar fertilization increased the accumulation of N and RNf by 22% and 24%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1164–1270 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil N at 4.5 g per plot plus two 0.75-g foliar applications gave the greatest N accumulation and recovery.

Taxon
sugarcanee1
Treatment
4.5 g plot−1 of N applied to the soil, with two applications of 0.75 g plot−1 of N on the leafe0
Outcome
accumulations of N and RNfe0
Direction
greatere0

Verbatim

e0

“The fertilization management with 4.5 g plot−1 of N applied to the soil, with two applications of 0.75 g plot−1 of N on the leaf, obtained greater accumulations of N and RNf”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1272–1445 · show in text ↑
e1

“nitrogen nutrition in sugarcane.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 211–243 · show in text ↑

fertilization · molecular: metabolites · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

34 papers: 25 positive, 9 negative or no effect

24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

30 papers more in this group

See all 34 papers →

application · molecular: metabolites · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results agree

13 papers: 13 positive, 0 negative or no effect

12 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 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.