Abstract
Abstract A change from the use of fertilisers containing sulphur (S) to predominantly urea for supply of nitrogen (N) to wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) crops, and the generally low S status of New Zealand soils has coincided with a decline in the quality of wheat flour. Increased farinograph dough work input (WI) and increased extensigraph resistance have emerged with current crop management practices. The dynamics of N and S uptake were studied in a factorial experiment with four commercial wheat cultivars known to differ in yield potential, grain N content, and dough rheological properties. Treatments consisted of three levels of N fertiliser (nil, early application of 150 kg N/ha in three splits, and 150 early + 100 kg N/ha applied at anthesis) and two S levels (nil and 50 kg S/ha at emergence). N fertiliser strongly increased N uptake in vegetative parts and grain. In contrast, there was little effect of S fertiliser on grain yield or grain N and S concentration or uptake. However, S fertiliser treatment did raise the level of S uptake in vegetative plant material. S treatment reduced the N: S ratio. However, N treatment consistently had a greater influence than S fertiliser on mixing requirement (WI and water absorption) and extensigraph tests. Opportunities to manage S nutrition during crop growth in order to influence dough or baking characteristics existed only under high N management. In this situation, there was a significant reduction in WI following S fertiliser application. Cultivar choice was the single best option for achieving the required flour characteristics. Flour from wheat cultivars ‘Monad’ and ‘Otane’ had strong dough rheological properties suggesting they were well suited to breadmaking. WI was higher in ‘Monad’ than ‘Otane’ even though grain S concentrations were lower. The differences in WI could partially be explained by their grain N: S composition. This was, in turn, influenced by the level of soil mineral N and sulphate.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen fertiliser strongly increased nitrogen uptake in vegetative tissues and grain.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- N fertilisere0
- Outcome
- N uptake in vegetative parts and graine0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“N fertiliser strongly increased N uptake in vegetative parts and grain.”
t0“wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertiliser had little effect on grain yield or grain nitrogen and sulphur concentration and uptake.
- Treatment
- S fertilisere0
- Outcome
- grain yield or grain N and S concentration or uptakee0
- Direction
- little effecte0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“there was little effect of S fertiliser on grain yield or grain N and S concentration or uptake.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertiliser raised sulphur uptake in vegetative plant material.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“S fertiliser treatment did raise the level of S uptake in vegetative plant material.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur treatment reduced the nitrogen to sulphur ratio.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“S treatment reduced the N: S ratio.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen treatment influenced dough mixing requirements and extensigraph tests more than sulphur fertiliser.
- Outcome
- mixing requirement (WI and water absorption) and extensigraph testse0
- Direction
- greater influencee0
- Comparator
- S fertilisere0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“N treatment consistently had a greater influence than S fertiliser on mixing requirement (WI and water absorption) and extensigraph tests.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur management affected dough or baking characteristics only under high nitrogen management.
- Treatment
- manage S nutritione0
- Outcome
- dough or baking characteristicse0
- Qualifier
- only under high N managemente0
Not reportedTaxonDirection
Verbatim
e0“Opportunities to manage S nutrition during crop growth in order to influence dough or baking characteristics existed only under high N management.”
Claim · model-written summary
With high nitrogen, sulphur fertiliser significantly reduced dough work input.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“there was a significant reduction in WI following S fertiliser application.”
Claim · model-written summary
Cultivar choice was judged the best way to attain desired flour characteristics.
- Outcome
- Cultivar choicee0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“Cultivar choice was the single best option for achieving the required flour characteristics.”
Claim · model-written summary
Flour of Monad and Otane had strong dough rheological properties suited to breadmaking.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Material
- ‘Monad’ and ‘Otane’e0
- Outcome
- dough rheological propertiese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flour from wheat cultivars ‘Monad’ and ‘Otane’ had strong dough rheological properties suggesting they were well suited to breadmaking.”
Claim · model-written summary
Monad had higher dough work input than Otane despite lower grain sulphur concentration.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“WI was higher in ‘Monad’ than ‘Otane’ even though grain S concentrations were lower.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors partly attributed cultivar differences in dough work input to grain nitrogen to sulphur composition.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“The differences in WI could partially be explained by their grain N: S composition.”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil mineral nitrogen and sulphate influenced grain nitrogen to sulphur composition.
Not reportedTaxonDirection
Verbatim
e0“their grain N: S composition. This was, in turn, influenced by the level of soil mineral N and sulphate.”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
50 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- no effect
62 papers more in this group
See all 66 papers →sulfur atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 124 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
144 papers more in this group
See all 148 papers →fertilization · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
853 papers in the same direction as this paper · 95 in the opposite direction · 10 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
955 papers more in this group
See all 959 papers →fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
322 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3,115 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3,434 papers more in this group
See all 3,438 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.