Paper · 1988 · Journal of Plant Nutrition

Field evaluation of inorganic and chelated iron fertilizers as foliar sprays and soil application

David Wm. Reed; Calvin G. Lyons; George Ray McEachern

7
claims
15
verbatim quotes
42
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract A series of inorganic and chelated ferric and ferrous fertilizers were tested for their ability to alleviate Fe chlorosis as foliar and soil application on peach and grape under field conditions. Limited re‐greening was obtained with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate, ferrous sulfate and DTPA on peaches, and with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate and ferrous sulfate and soil application of ferric citrate/ammonium sulfate and ferric citrate/urea/ammonium nitrate on grapes. The only treatments that resulted in complete elimination of iron deficiency, as indicated by complete re‐greening and plant rating, was soil application of EDDHA on both peach and grape. Soil application of methyl‐EDDHA was almost as effective as EDDHA, resulting in slightly less intense re‐greening and chlorophyll content.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate, ferrous sulfate and DTPA produced limited re-greening in peach.

Treatment
foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate, ferrous sulfate and DTPAe0
Outcome
re‐greeninge2
Direction
Limitede2
Setting
field conditionse1

Not reportedComparator

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

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Limited re‐greening was obtained with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate, ferrous sulfate and DTPA on peaches”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 205–333 · show in text ↑
e1

“on peach and grape under field conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 162–204 · show in text ↑
e2

“Limited re‐greening was obtained with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate, ferrous sulfate and DTPA on peaches”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 205–333 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate and ferrous sulfate produced limited re-greening in grape.

Taxon
grapee1
Treatment
foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate and ferrous sulfatee0
Outcome
re‐greeninge2
Direction
Limitede2
Setting
field conditionse1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate and ferrous sulfate and soil application of ferric citrate/ammonium sulfate and ferric citrate/urea/ammonium nitrate on grapes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 339–524 · show in text ↑
e1

“on peach and grape under field conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 162–204 · show in text ↑
e2

“Limited re‐greening was obtained with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate, ferrous sulfate and DTPA on peaches”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 205–333 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

soil application of ferric citrate/ammonium sulfate and ferric citrate/urea/ammonium nitrate produced limited re-greening in grape.

Taxon
grapee1
Treatment
soil application of ferric citrate/ammonium sulfate and ferric citrate/urea/ammonium nitratee0
Outcome
re‐greeninge2
Direction
Limitede2
Setting
field conditionse1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate and ferrous sulfate and soil application of ferric citrate/ammonium sulfate and ferric citrate/urea/ammonium nitrate on grapes”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 339–524 · show in text ↑
e1

“on peach and grape under field conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 162–204 · show in text ↑
e2

“Limited re‐greening was obtained with foliar application of ferric citrate/ammonium nitrate, ferrous sulfate and DTPA on peaches”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 205–333 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil EDDHA completely eliminated iron deficiency in peach.

Treatment
soil application of EDDHAe0
Outcome
iron deficiencye0
Direction
complete eliminatione0

Not reportedComparator

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

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The only treatments that resulted in complete elimination of iron deficiency, as indicated by complete re‐greening and plant rating, was soil application of EDDHA on both peach and grape.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 526–713 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil EDDHA completely eliminated iron deficiency in grape.

Taxon
grapee0
Treatment
soil application of EDDHAe0
Outcome
iron deficiencye0
Direction
complete eliminatione0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The only treatments that resulted in complete elimination of iron deficiency, as indicated by complete re‐greening and plant rating, was soil application of EDDHA on both peach and grape.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 526–713 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil methyl-EDDHA produced slightly less intense re-greening than EDDHA.

Taxon
peach and grapee1
Treatment
Soil application of methyl‐EDDHAe0
Outcome
re‐greeninge0
Direction
slightly less intensee0
Comparator
EDDHAe0

Verbatim

e0

“Soil application of methyl‐EDDHA was almost as effective as EDDHA, resulting in slightly less intense re‐greening and chlorophyll content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 714–852 · show in text ↑
e1

“on peach and grape under field conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 162–204 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil methyl-EDDHA produced slightly less chlorophyll content than EDDHA.

Taxon
peach and grapee1
Treatment
Soil application of methyl‐EDDHAe0
Outcome
chlorophyll contente0
Direction
slightly less intensee0
Comparator
EDDHAe0

Verbatim

e0

“Soil application of methyl‐EDDHA was almost as effective as EDDHA, resulting in slightly less intense re‐greening and chlorophyll content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 714–852 · show in text ↑
e1

“on peach and grape under field conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 162–204 · show in text ↑

application · physiology: pigments · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results

16 papers: 14 positive, 2 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

application · physiology: pigments · VitisPositive and negative results

22 papers: 21 positive, 1 negative or no effect

20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

18 papers more in this group

See all 22 papers →

application · nutrient: content · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results

24 papers: 19 positive, 5 negative or no effect

18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 papers →

application · nutrient: content · VitisPositive and negative results

37 papers: 35 positive, 2 negative or no effect

34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

33 papers more in this group

See all 37 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.