Abstract
SUMMARY Five Zn-deficient soils designated A–E (pH 7·3–7·7) and a reference soil F (pH 7·6) were used in a glasshouse study on maize in which five fertilizer treatments: 75 μg P/g alone and together with all combinations of 0 and 5 μg/g of Mg and Zn and with 10 μg Mg + 5 μg Zn/g and a control were applied. The forage yield of soils A–E ranged from 2·5 to 2·9 g when no Zn was applied and from 5·1 to 5·6 g with added Zn, showing that Zn was the major limiting nutrient. Applied Mg significantly increased yield, the main exceptions being soils D and E which had the highest exchangeable Mg. Addition of Mg to a P but not PZn treatment significantly increased P concentration and uptake. For soils B and E, Zn addition significantly depressed P concentration in maize. The P treatment significantly depressed Zn concentration but increased Mg concentration and uptake by maize. Although Mg application either depressed or had no effect on Mg content of maize, it caused a significant increase in Zn concentration and uptake. The correlation coefficient ( r ) between Zn and Mg in maize was – 0·61 (P < 0·001). Possibly, Mg was replacing Zn in the clay lattice or in its metallo-protein complex within the root.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 15
Claim · model-written summary
On soils A–E, forage yield was 2·5 to 2·9 g without Zn.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The forage yield of soils A–E ranged from 2·5 to 2·9 g when no Zn was applied”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
On soils A–E, forage yield was 5·1 to 5·6 g with Zn.
- Treatment
- added Zne0
- Outcome
- forage yielde0
- Direction
- increaseinferrede0
- Value
- 5·1 to 5·6 ge0
- Comparator
- no Zne0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The forage yield of soils A–E ranged from 2·5 to 2·9 g when no Zn was applied and from 5·1 to 5·6 g with added Zn”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors identify Zn as the major nutrient limiting maize yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Zn was the major limiting nutrient”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Applied Mg significantly increased maize yield except mainly in soils D and E.
- Treatment
- Applied Mge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- main exceptionse0
- Setting
- soils D and Ee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applied Mg significantly increased yield, the main exceptions being soils D and E which had the highest exchangeable Mg”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding Mg to P treatment increased maize P concentration significantly.
- Treatment
- Addition of Mg to a Pe0
- Outcome
- P concentratione0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- PZn treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Addition of Mg to a P but not PZn treatment significantly increased P concentration and uptake”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Adding Mg to P treatment increased maize P uptake significantly.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Addition of Mg to a P but not PZn treatment significantly increased P concentration and uptake”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Zn addition significantly lowered maize P concentration in soils B and E.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For soils B and E, Zn addition significantly depressed P concentration in maize”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
P treatment significantly lowered maize Zn concentration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The P treatment significantly depressed Zn concentration but increased Mg concentration and uptake by maize”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
P treatment increased maize Mg concentration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The P treatment significantly depressed Zn concentration but increased Mg concentration and uptake by maize”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
P treatment increased maize Mg uptake.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The P treatment significantly depressed Zn concentration but increased Mg concentration and uptake by maize”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mg application depressed or did not change maize Mg content.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mg application either depressed or had no effect on Mg content of maize”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mg application significantly increased maize Zn concentration.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although Mg application either depressed or had no effect on Mg content of maize, it caused a significant increase in Zn concentration and uptake”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Mg application significantly increased maize Zn uptake.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Although Mg application either depressed or had no effect on Mg content of maize, it caused a significant increase in Zn concentration and uptake”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize Zn and Mg were negatively correlated, with r = – 0·61.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The correlation coefficient ( r ) between Zn and Mg in maize was – 0·61 (P < 0·001)”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest that Mg may replace Zn in clay or a root metalloprotein complex.
- Organ / stage
- roote0
- Compound
- Mge0
- Outcome
- replacing Zn in the clay lattice or in its metallo-protein complexe0
- Qualifier
- Possiblye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Possibly, Mg was replacing Zn in the clay lattice or in its metallo-protein complex within the root”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
magnesium atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
43 papers more in this group
See all 47 papers →zinc atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
390 papers in the same direction as this paper · 47 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
437 papers more in this group
See all 441 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.