Abstract
Optimizing nutrient management measures is fundamental to balancing tobacco yield and quality. While individual effects of fertilizers are well-documented, the integrated synergy of organic amendments with water-soluble fertilizers or microbial agents remains relatively scarce. Hence, a two-year field experiment was conducted to evaluate the comprehensive effects of five distinct nutrient management measures, no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM), on tobacco growth, nutrient uptake and its use efficiency, leaf chemical composition, yield, quality, and revenue. The results revealed that WS and OM treatments increased tobacco yield and quality (proportion of premium and medium-grade tobacco leaves) by 14.9%-24.6% and 1.6%-6.3%, respectively, compared to the CF treatment. These improvements were primarily driven by enhanced plant height, stem girth, number of leaves, leaf area index, biomass, nutrient use efficiency and total sugar, potassium contents. Specifically, WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%, P use efficiency by 62.7%-149.6% and 79.2%-112.4%, K use efficiency by 473.1%-551.4% and 474.6%-480.5%, tobacco yield by 20.9%-24.6% and 14.9%-19.1%, the proportion of premium-grade leaf by 6.5%-17.2% and 8.9%-11.1%, and tobacco revenue by 26.8%-29.0% and 22.8%-31.5%, respectively. In summary, both the WS and OM treatments significantly improved the nutrient use efficiency, tobacco yield, leaf quality and revenue; among these, the WS treatment demonstrated the best comprehensive performance. Thus, organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer is crucial for promoting the sustainable development of the tobacco industry.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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
WS and OM increased tobacco N use efficiency relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobacco
Nicotiana tabacumt0 - Treatment
- WSe1
- Outcome
- N use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 106.0%-130.9%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco N use efficiency relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- OMe1
- Outcome
- N use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 97.4%-126.1%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco P use efficiency relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WSe1
- Outcome
- P use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 62.7%-149.6%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“P use efficiency by 62.7%-149.6% and 79.2%-112.4%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco P use efficiency relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- OMe1
- Outcome
- P use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 79.2%-112.4%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“P use efficiency by 62.7%-149.6% and 79.2%-112.4%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco K use efficiency relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WSe1
- Outcome
- K use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 473.1%-551.4%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“K use efficiency by 473.1%-551.4% and 474.6%-480.5%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco K use efficiency relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- OMe1
- Outcome
- K use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 474.6%-480.5%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“K use efficiency by 473.1%-551.4% and 474.6%-480.5%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco yield relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WSe1
- Outcome
- tobacco yielde0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 20.9%-24.6%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tobacco yield by 20.9%-24.6% and 14.9%-19.1%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco yield relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- OMe1
- Outcome
- tobacco yielde0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 14.9%-19.1%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tobacco yield by 20.9%-24.6% and 14.9%-19.1%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco premium-grade leaf proportion relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WSe1
- Outcome
- proportion of premium-grade leafe0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 6.5%-17.2%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the proportion of premium-grade leaf by 6.5%-17.2% and 8.9%-11.1%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco premium-grade leaf proportion relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- OMe1
- Outcome
- proportion of premium-grade leafe0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 8.9%-11.1%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the proportion of premium-grade leaf by 6.5%-17.2% and 8.9%-11.1%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco revenue relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WSe1
- Outcome
- tobacco revenuee0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 26.8%-29.0%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tobacco revenue by 26.8%-29.0% and 22.8%-31.5%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM increased tobacco revenue relative to conventional chemical fertilizer.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- OMe1
- Outcome
- tobacco revenuee0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 22.8%-31.5%e0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tobacco revenue by 26.8%-29.0% and 22.8%-31.5%”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM improved plant height, stem girth, and leaf number.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WS and OMe1
- Outcome
- plant height, stem girth, number of leavese0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These improvements were primarily driven by enhanced plant height, stem girth, number of leaves, leaf area index, biomass, nutrient use efficiency and total sugar, potassium contents.”
t0“water-soluble and microbial fertilizers achieve mutually benefits of high nutrient utilization, improved yield and quality in tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM improved leaf area index and biomass.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WS and OMe1
- Outcome
- leaf area index, biomasse0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These improvements were primarily driven by enhanced plant height, stem girth, number of leaves, leaf area index, biomass, nutrient use efficiency and total sugar, potassium contents.”
t0“water-soluble and microbial fertilizers achieve mutually benefits of high nutrient utilization, improved yield and quality in tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS and OM enhanced total sugar and potassium contents.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WS and OMe1
- Outcome
- total sugar, potassium contentse0
- Direction
- enhancede0
- Comparator
- CFe2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These improvements were primarily driven by enhanced plant height, stem girth, number of leaves, leaf area index, biomass, nutrient use efficiency and total sugar, potassium contents.”
t0“water-soluble and microbial fertilizers achieve mutually benefits of high nutrient utilization, improved yield and quality in tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
WS had the best comprehensive performance among the fertilizer treatments.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- WS treatmente0
- Outcome
- best comprehensive performancee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“among these, the WS treatment demonstrated the best comprehensive performance.”
t0“tobacco cultivation”
e1“WS and OM increased N use efficiency by 106.0%-130.9% and 97.4%-126.1%”
e2“no fertilization (CK), conventional chemical fertilizer (CF), organic fertilizer combined with conventional chemical fertilizer (CM), organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer (WS), organic fertilizer combined with a compound microbial agent (OM)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer for sustainable tobacco production.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacume0
- Treatment
- organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizere0
- Outcome
- organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“organic fertilizer combined with water-soluble fertilizer is crucial for promoting the sustainable development of the tobacco industry.”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · nutrient: efficiency · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →fertilization · quality: sugar starch · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
36 papers more in this group
See all 40 papers →fertilization · organism · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
39 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
43 papers more in this group
See all 47 papers →fertilization · growth · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
153 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
178 papers more in this group
See all 182 papers →fertilization · yield · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
186 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
210 papers more in this group
See all 214 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.