Abstract
Abstract Two greenhouse experiments, the first a complete factorial comprising six rates of lime, four of phosphorus (P) and three of zinc (Zn) on two kaolinitic Ultisols, and the second involving factorial combinations of lime at four levels or gypsum at two chemically equivalent levels with three levels of P on one Ultisol, examined lime‐nutrient interactions in the growth of maize ( Zea mays L.) shoots and roots in relation to interactions in nutrient availability in the soil. Strong, highly significant interactions in maize growth were observed on both soils. The lime‐P interaction was positive and occurred only at lime rates less than equivalent to the KCl‐exchangeable Al content. Both total P uptake and root surface area per unit length increased substantially with liming to pH 5.5, but P uptake per unit root surface area was not altered. Total P uptake was linearly correlated with root surface area at each level of applied P and with the product of root surface area and available P, suggesting that the lime‐P interaction was due primarily to the effect of lime on improving root exploitation of available P in the soil. The third‐order lime × P × Zn interaction was observed at high lime rates in the pH range of 6 to 7. Overliming depressed yields only where Zn was not applied; shoot yields were closely related to Zn activities in soil solution. total P uptake was not reduced by liming soils to neutrality but total Zn uptake was linearly correlated with the product of Zn activity (controlled by soil pH) and root weight (influenced by P nutrition). Aluminum toxicity was shown to be the primary growth‐limiting factor for maize grown in the two Ultisols under greenhouse conditions. Plants did not respond to gypsum treatments even though tissue concentrations and gross uptake rates of Ca were raised to levels comparable to equivalent lime treatments. Maize shoot yields were closely related to exchangeable Al saturation and total Al concentration in soil solution and declined at levels in excess of 28% and 4 µg/ml, respectively. Maximum shoot yields occurred at comparatively low rates of lime sufficient to raise soil pH to about 5.0 in the fertilized soils.
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 18
Claim · model-written summary
Maize growth showed strong, highly significant interactions on both soils.
- Outcome
- interactions in maize growthe0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Strong, highly significant interactions in maize growth were observed on both soils.”
Claim · model-written summary
The lime–P interaction was positive only below lime rates equivalent to KCl-exchangeable Al content.
- Treatment
- limee0
- Outcome
- lime‐P interactione0
- Direction
- positivee0
- Qualifier
- only at lime rates less than equivalent to the KCl‐exchangeable Al contente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lime‐P interaction was positive and occurred only at lime rates less than equivalent to the KCl‐exchangeable Al content.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming to pH 5.5 substantially increased total P uptake and root surface area per unit length.
- Treatment
- liming to pH 5.5e0
- Outcome
- total P uptake and root surface area per unit lengthe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both total P uptake and root surface area per unit length increased substantially with liming to pH 5.5”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming did not alter P uptake per unit root surface area.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Both total P uptake and root surface area per unit length increased substantially with liming to pH 5.5, but P uptake per unit root surface area was not altered.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Total P uptake correlated linearly with root surface area at each applied P level.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total P uptake was linearly correlated with root surface area at each level of applied P”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Total P uptake correlated with the product of root surface area and available P.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total P uptake was linearly correlated with root surface area at each level of applied P and with the product of root surface area and available P”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors attributed the lime–P interaction primarily to improved root exploitation of soil P.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“suggesting that the lime‐P interaction was due primarily to the effect of lime on improving root exploitation of available P in the soil”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
A third-order lime × P × Zn interaction occurred at high lime rates at pH 6 to 7.
- Outcome
- third‐order lime × P × Zn interactione0
- Qualifier
- at high lime rates in the pH range of 6 to 7e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The third‐order lime × P × Zn interaction was observed at high lime rates in the pH range of 6 to 7.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Overliming depressed yield only without applied Zn.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Overliming depressed yields only where Zn was not applied”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Shoot yields were closely related to soil-solution Zn activities.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“shoot yields were closely related to Zn activities in soil solution”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Liming to neutrality did not reduce total P uptake.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“total P uptake was not reduced by liming soils to neutrality”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Total Zn uptake correlated linearly with Zn activity multiplied by root weight.
- Compound
- Zne0
- Outcome
- total Zn uptakee0
- Qualifier
- the product of Zn activity (controlled by soil pH) and root weight (influenced by P nutrition)e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“total Zn uptake was linearly correlated with the product of Zn activity (controlled by soil pH) and root weight (influenced by P nutrition)”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Aluminum toxicity was the primary limitation on maize growth in the two greenhouse Ultisols.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Aluminum toxicity was shown to be the primary growth‐limiting factor for maize grown in the two Ultisols under greenhouse conditions.”
Claim · model-written summary
Plants did not respond to gypsum treatments.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants did not respond to gypsum treatments”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Gypsum raised tissue Ca concentrations and gross Ca uptake to levels comparable with equivalent lime treatments.
- Treatment
- gypsum treatmentse0
- Outcome
- tissue concentrations and gross uptake rates of Cae0
- Direction
- raisede0
- Comparator
- equivalent lime treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Plants did not respond to gypsum treatments even though tissue concentrations and gross uptake rates of Ca were raised to levels comparable to equivalent lime treatments.”
t0“Maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize shoot yield declined above 28% exchangeable Al saturation.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize shoot yields were closely related to exchangeable Al saturation and total Al concentration in soil solution and declined at levels in excess of 28% and 4 µg/ml, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize shoot yield declined above 4 µg/ml total soil-solution Al.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize shoot yields were closely related to exchangeable Al saturation and total Al concentration in soil solution and declined at levels in excess of 28% and 4 µg/ml, respectively.”
Claim · model-written summary
Maximum shoot yields occurred at low lime rates raising fertilized-soil pH to about 5.0.
- Treatment
- comparatively low rates of limee0
- Outcome
- shoot yieldse0
- Direction
- Maximume0
- Qualifier
- sufficient to raise soil pH to about 5.0 in the fertilized soilse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maximum shoot yields occurred at comparatively low rates of lime sufficient to raise soil pH to about 5.0 in the fertilized soils.”
t0“Maize”
The same questions in other papers
ph · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
39 papers more in this group
See all 43 papers →lime · growth · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
52 papers more in this group
See all 56 papers →lime · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
184 papers in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
215 papers more in this group
See all 219 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.