Abstract
Abstract The aim of the present study was to investigate the influence of spraying with Aminoplant on the yield of two spinach cultivars in the spring and autumn cultivations. The experiment was carried out in 2008 and 2009 in the experimental station of the University of Agriculture in Krakow, Poland. Three factors were taken into consideration: (1) cultivar: ‘Rembrandt F 1 ’ and ‘Spiros F 1 ’; (2) time of cultivation: spring and autumn; (3) dose of Aminoplant: control (without Aminoplant), 1.5 dm 3 ha -1 and 3.0 dm 3 ha -1 . The spinach yield was dependent on the time of production and cultivar type, and ranged between 18.6-44.8 t ha -1 . Both cultivars yielded better in autumn cultivation. Spraying with Aminoplant had no effect on spinach yield. Dry matter content in spinach leaves was between 6.3-11.2 g 100 g -1 . Spinach grown in the autumn had a greater content of dry matter in comparison to the spring cultivation. In 2009, ‘Rembrant F 1 ’ was characterized by greater dry matter content than ‘Spiros F 1 ’. Aminoplant in a dose of 3.0 dm 3 ha -1 lowered dry matter content in spinach leaves as compared to the control. The nitrate content in spinach was differentiated (558-3506 mg NO 3 kg -1 f.m.) and depended on the time of cultivation, the cultivar, and the Aminoplant dose.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Spinach yield varied by production time and cultivar and ranged from 18.6 to 44.8 t ha -1.
- Taxon
- spinach
Spinacia oleraceat0 - Material
- cultivar typee0
- Outcome
- spinach yielde0
- Value
- 18.6-44.8 t ha -1e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The spinach yield was dependent on the time of production and cultivar type, and ranged between 18.6-44.8 t ha -1 .”
t0“spinach ( Spinacia oleracea L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Both spinach cultivars yielded better in autumn than spring cultivation.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceat0
- Treatment
- autumn cultivatione0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- springe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both cultivars yielded better in autumn cultivation.”
e1“time of cultivation: spring and autumn”
t0“spinach ( Spinacia oleracea L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Aminoplant spraying had no effect on spinach yield.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceat0
- Treatment
- Spraying with Aminoplante0
- Outcome
- spinach yielde0
- Direction
- no effecte0
- Comparator
- control (without Aminoplant)e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spraying with Aminoplant had no effect on spinach yield.”
e1“control (without Aminoplant)”
t0“spinach ( Spinacia oleracea L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinach leaf dry matter content ranged from 6.3 to 11.2 g 100 g -1.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceae0
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Outcome
- Dry matter contente0
- Value
- 6.3-11.2 g 100 g -1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dry matter content in spinach leaves was between 6.3-11.2 g 100 g -1 .”
Claim · model-written summary
Autumn-grown spinach had greater dry matter content than spring-grown spinach.
- Taxon
- SpinachSpinacia oleraceae0
- Treatment
- autumne0
- Outcome
- content of dry mattere0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- spring cultivatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spinach grown in the autumn had a greater content of dry matter in comparison to the spring cultivation.”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2009, Rembrant F 1 had greater dry matter content than Spiros F 1.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceat0
- Material
- Rembrant F 1e0
- Outcome
- dry matter contente0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- In 2009e0
- Comparator
- Spiros F 1e0
Not reportedSetting
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2009, ‘Rembrant F 1 ’ was characterized by greater dry matter content than ‘Spiros F 1 ’.”
t0“spinach ( Spinacia oleracea L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Aminoplant at 3.0 dm 3 ha -1 lowered spinach leaf dry matter content versus the control.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceae0
- Organ / stage
- leavese0
- Treatment
- Aminoplant in a dose of 3.0 dm 3 ha -1e0
- Outcome
- dry matter contente0
- Direction
- lowerede0
- Comparator
- the controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Aminoplant in a dose of 3.0 dm 3 ha -1 lowered dry matter content in spinach leaves as compared to the control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinach nitrate content varied from 558 to 3506 mg NO 3 kg -1 f.m. and depended on cultivation time, cultivar and Aminoplant dose.
- Taxon
- spinachSpinacia oleraceae0
- Material
- cultivare0
- Treatment
- Aminoplant dosee0
- Outcome
- nitrate contente0
- Value
- 558-3506 mg NO 3 kg -1 f.m.e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The nitrate content in spinach was differentiated (558-3506 mg NO 3 kg -1 f.m.) and depended on the time of cultivation, the cultivar, and the Aminoplant dose.”
The same questions in other papers
application · yield · Spinacia oleracea (spinach)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.