Abstract
The rate of nitrogen uptake by sugar beet canopy during the growing season is a driving factor in both dry matter production and its distribution between leaves and the storage root. It has been hypothesized that nitrogen accumulation in both parts of the beet is significantly affected by the regime of P and K supply to plants. This assumption has been verified with the data obtained from a field static experiment, conducted in 2001-2003, with eight fertilizing variants: without nitrogen (absolute control, PK), without one of the main nutrients (KN, PN), with a reduced amount of phosphorus and potassium (N + 25% PK, N + 50% PK) and with the recommended amounts of basic nutrients (NPK, NP*K, P* – P in the form of PAPR). Amounts of in-season accumulated nitrogen in sugar beet parts were measured on eight consecutive sampling dates, in two- to three-week intervals. The general pattern of N accumulation in leaves is best described by a quadratic equation, but follows a linear function in storage roots. The maximum rate of nitrogen accumulation depended on years and fertilizing variants. Limited supply of nutrients to beet plants, caused by the course of the weather or the applied fertilizers (less than 50% of the recommended N rate and without K), was the main reason for a lower rate of nitrogen accumulation in storage roots in the first part of the growing season. The course of absolute and relative nitrogen uptake rates shows that in the second part of the season the sugar beet could compensate the uptake of N from its soil resources. However, the effect of compensatory N uptake on yield of storage roots was inconsistent. When water and nutrients were in ample supply, e.g. in 2001, the additionally absorbed nitrogen could be used as an indicator of the yield potential of sugar beet. Under other growth conditions, it is used
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf nitrogen accumulation followed a quadratic pattern.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Outcome
- N accumulation in leavese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The general pattern of N accumulation in leaves is best described by a quadratic equation, but follows a linear function in storage roots.”
t0“sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Storage-root nitrogen accumulation followed a linear pattern.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Outcome
- linear function in storage rootse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The general pattern of N accumulation in leaves is best described by a quadratic equation, but follows a linear function in storage roots.”
t0“sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
The maximum nitrogen accumulation rate varied by year and fertilizing variant.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- fertilizing variantse0
- Outcome
- maximum rate of nitrogen accumulatione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The maximum rate of nitrogen accumulation depended on years and fertilizing variants.”
t0“sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Limited nutrient supply lowered storage-root nitrogen accumulation rate early in the season.
- Taxon
- beet plants
Beta vulgarise0 - Treatment
- less than 50% of the recommended N rate and without Ke0
- Outcome
- rate of nitrogen accumulation in storage rootse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- first part of the growing seasone0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Limited supply of nutrients to beet plants, caused by the course of the weather or the applied fertilizers (less than 50% of the recommended N rate and without K), was the main reason for a lower rate of nitrogen accumulation in storage roots in the first part of the growing season.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugar beet compensated nitrogen uptake from soil in the second part of the season.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- compensate the uptake of Ne0
- Qualifier
- second part of the seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the second part of the season the sugar beet could compensate the uptake of N from its soil resources.”
Claim · model-written summary
Compensatory nitrogen uptake had inconsistent effects on storage-root yield.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- compensatory N uptakee0
- Outcome
- yield of storage rootse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the effect of compensatory N uptake on yield of storage roots was inconsistent.”
t0“sugar beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Additional nitrogen absorbed under ample water and nutrient supply indicated sugar beet yield potential.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- additionally absorbed nitrogene0
- Outcome
- yield potentiale0
- Qualifier
- water and nutrients were in ample supplye0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When water and nutrients were in ample supply, e.g. in 2001, the additionally absorbed nitrogen could be used as an indicator of the yield potential of sugar beet.”
The same questions in other papers
nitrogen · nutrient: content · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 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.