Paper · 2007 · University of Zagreb University Computing Centre (SRCE)

Nitrogen and phosphorus content, hectoliter weight and yield variations of wheat grain as affected by cropping intensity.

Zlatko Svečnjak; Marija Bujan; I. Dragojević; et al.

14
claims
37
verbatim quotes
4
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · other-oa

Abstract

Public concerns over the potential environmental hazards of intensive agriculture have renewed an interest in the low-input nitrogen (N) fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). A two-year study (2001 and 2002) was conducted to determine the infl uence of cropping intensity, namely the low-N (67 kg N ha-1) and high-N (194 kg N ha-1) input levels on the grain N and phosphorus (P) content, phytate-P (phytic acid and its salts), hectoliter weight and grain yield of three bread wheat cultivars widely grown in Croatia. Growing conditions signifi cantly aff ected grain yields averaging 6641 kg ha-1 in the fi rst growing season and 8295 kg ha-1 in the following year. Despite an associated increase in the 1000-grain weights, the use of the low-N fertilization brought about a signifi cant decrease in grain yield, hectoliter weight and grain N content in all cultivars by an average of 18.1%, 1.5% and 22.6%, respectively, when compared to the high-N fertilization level. The reductions in grain N content were consistent in both years regardless of variations in grain yields among three tested cultivars. Grain N content under the low-N fertilization averaged 17.1 g kg-1 only, which may limit its use for breadmaking. In contrast, grain P content was not aff ected by N fertilization or growing season and averaged 4.70 g kg-1 across all treatments. Absolutely small, but significant diff erences existed among cultivars for total grain P content, of which about 80% was in the form of phytate-P. A negative correlation between the 1000-grain weight and P content was found because of tendency toward lower P content in heavier grains. When compared to the high-N input, the low-N fertilization practices for wheat crop were associated with a signifi cant decrease in grain yield and grain N content in all cultivars, but had no eff ect on grain P content regardless of cultivar.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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 14

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Low-N fertilization decreased wheat grain yield by an average of 18.1% compared with high-N fertilization.

Treatment
low-N fertilizatione3
Outcome
grain yielde1
Direction
decreasee1
Value
18.1%e1
Comparator
high-N fertilizatione2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“a signifi cant decrease in grain yield, hectoliter weight and grain N content in all cultivars by an average of 18.1%, 1.5% and 22.6%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 793–940 · show in text ↑
e2

“when compared to the high-N fertilization level”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 942–989 · show in text ↑
e3

“the use of the low-N fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–778 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Low-N fertilization decreased wheat hectoliter weight by 1.5% compared with high-N fertilization.

Treatment
low-N fertilizatione3
Outcome
hectoliter weighte1
Direction
decreasee1
Value
1.5%e1
Comparator
high-N fertilizatione2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“a signifi cant decrease in grain yield, hectoliter weight and grain N content in all cultivars by an average of 18.1%, 1.5% and 22.6%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 793–940 · show in text ↑
e2

“when compared to the high-N fertilization level”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 942–989 · show in text ↑
e3

“the use of the low-N fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–778 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Low-N fertilization decreased wheat grain N content by 22.6% compared with high-N fertilization.

Treatment
low-N fertilizatione3
Outcome
grain N contente1
Direction
decreasee1
Value
22.6%e1
Comparator
high-N fertilizatione2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“a signifi cant decrease in grain yield, hectoliter weight and grain N content in all cultivars by an average of 18.1%, 1.5% and 22.6%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 793–940 · show in text ↑
e2

“when compared to the high-N fertilization level”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 942–989 · show in text ↑
e3

“the use of the low-N fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–778 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grain N content under low-N fertilization averaged 17.1 g kg-1.

Treatment
low-N fertilizatione4
Outcome
Grain N contente4
Value
17.1 g kg-1e4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e4

“Grain N content under the low-N fertilization averaged 17.1 g kg-1 only”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1126–1197 · show in text ↑
Recommendationhypothesisoriginal resultnegativebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Grain N content of 17.1 g kg-1 under low-N fertilization may limit wheat use for breadmaking.

Outcome
use for breadmakinge5

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e5

“which may limit its use for breadmaking”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1199–1238 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

N fertilization did not affect wheat grain P content, which averaged 4.70 g kg-1 across treatments.

Treatment
N fertilizatione6
Outcome
grain P contente6
Direction
not aff ectede6
Value
4.70 g kg-1e6

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e6

“grain P content was not aff ected by N fertilization or growing season and averaged 4.70 g kg-1 across all treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1253–1370 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Growing season did not affect wheat grain P content.

Treatment
growing seasone6
Outcome
grain P contente6
Direction
not aff ectede6

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e6

“grain P content was not aff ected by N fertilization or growing season and averaged 4.70 g kg-1 across all treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1253–1370 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Significant but absolutely small differences in total grain P content existed among wheat cultivars.

Material
cultivarse7
Outcome
total grain P contente7
Qualifier
Absolutely smalle7

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e7

“Absolutely small, but significant diff erences existed among cultivars for total grain P content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1372–1468 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

About 80% of grain P was in the form of phytate-P.

Outcome
in the form of phytate-Pe1
Value
about 80%e1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“of which about 80% was in the form of phytate-P”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1470–1517 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A negative correlation was found between 1000-grain weight and grain P content.

Organ / stage
heavier grainse1
Outcome
P contente1
Direction
negativee1
Qualifier
1000-grain weighte1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“A negative correlation between the 1000-grain weight and P content was found because of tendency toward lower P content in heavier grains”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1519–1656 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Growing conditions significantly affected wheat grain yields.

Treatment
Growing conditionse1
Outcome
grain yieldse1

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“Growing conditions signifi cantly aff ected grain yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 537–593 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat grain yield averaged 6641 kg ha-1 in the first growing season.

Outcome
grain yieldse1
Value
6641 kg ha-1e2
Qualifier
fi rst growing seasone2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“Growing conditions signifi cantly aff ected grain yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 537–593 · show in text ↑
e2

“averaging 6641 kg ha-1 in the fi rst growing season”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 594–645 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Wheat grain yield averaged 8295 kg ha-1 in the following year.

Outcome
grain yieldse1
Value
8295 kg ha-1e2
Qualifier
in the following yeare2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“Growing conditions signifi cantly aff ected grain yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 537–593 · show in text ↑
e2

“8295 kg ha-1 in the following year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 650–684 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low-N fertilization was associated with an increase in 1000-grain weight.

Treatment
low-N fertilizatione3
Outcome
1000-grain weightse1
Direction
increasee1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fertilization practices for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–193 · show in text ↑
e1

“Despite an associated increase in the 1000-grain weights”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 686–742 · show in text ↑
e3

“the use of the low-N fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 744–778 · show in text ↑

climate site · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 7 positive, 8 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

nitrogen · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

479 papers: 410 positive, 69 negative or no effect

68 papers in the same direction as this paper · 410 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

475 papers more in this group

See all 479 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

959 papers: 854 positive, 105 negative or no effect

104 papers in the same direction as this paper · 854 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

955 papers more in this group

See all 959 papers →

nitrogen · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

2,061 papers: 1,737 positive, 324 negative or no effect

323 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,737 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2,057 papers more in this group

See all 2,061 papers →

fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

322 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3,115 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. 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.