Abstract
The importance of adequate sulfur (S) for maize (Zea mays L.) production has been recognized for many years and recently confirmed by positive yield responses. We compared a granular S(enhanced fertilizer material [SEF (13(33(0(15S)], granular ammonium sulfate [AMS (21(0(0(24S)], and liquid ammonium thiosulfate [ATS (12(0(0(26S)] on eroded Clarion (Typic Haplaquolls) hill slopes in central Iowa for three years. Applying 34 kg S/ha as SEF significantly (P≤0.05) increased mean V5 plant dry weight each year. AMS and ATS showed a similar but non(significant trend. Whole(plant S concentrations at V5 were generally higher than the control for all S sources. Grain yield and moisture content at harvest were not affected by S in 2006 and 2007. In 2008, 34 kg S/ha as SEF significantly increased yield by 0.76 Mg/ha. The agronomic efficiency of S (yield per unit applied) was greatest for SEF in 2006 and 2008 (12.3 and 22.5 kg grain (kg S) (1 , respectively). Below(normal precipitation during the 2006 and 2007 growing seasons and inherent soil variability presumably affected our S yield response, but overall we conclude that S may become a limiting nutrient for maize, especially if maize stover is harvested as a bio(energy feedstock.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
SEF at 34 kg S/ha significantly increased V5 plant dry weight each year.
- Treatment
- 34 kg S/ha as SEFe1
- Outcome
- mean V5 plant dry weighte1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Qualifier
- each yeare1
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“Applying 34 kg S/ha as SEF significantly (P≤0.05) increased mean V5 plant dry weight each year”
Claim · model-written summary
AMS showed a similar but nonsignificant upward trend in V5 plant dry weight.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“Applying 34 kg S/ha as SEF significantly (P≤0.05) increased mean V5 plant dry weight each year. AMS and ATS showed a similar but non(significant trend”
Claim · model-written summary
ATS showed a similar but nonsignificant upward trend in V5 plant dry weight.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“Applying 34 kg S/ha as SEF significantly (P≤0.05) increased mean V5 plant dry weight each year. AMS and ATS showed a similar but non(significant trend”
Claim · model-written summary
Whole-plant sulfur concentrations at V5 were generally higher than controls with all sulfur sources.
- Treatment
- all S sourcese1
- Outcome
- Whole(plant S concentrations at V5e1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- the controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“Whole(plant S concentrations at V5 were generally higher than the control for all S sources”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfur did not affect grain yield in 2006 and 2007.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“Grain yield and moisture content at harvest were not affected by S in 2006 and 2007”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulfur did not affect harvest moisture content in 2006 and 2007.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“Grain yield and moisture content at harvest were not affected by S in 2006 and 2007”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2008, SEF at 34 kg S/ha significantly increased grain yield by 0.76 Mg/ha.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“In 2008, 34 kg S/ha as SEF significantly increased yield by 0.76 Mg/ha”
Claim · model-written summary
SEF had the greatest sulfur agronomic efficiency in 2006, at 12.3 kg grain per kg S.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“The agronomic efficiency of S (yield per unit applied) was greatest for SEF in 2006 and 2008 (12.3 and 22.5 kg grain (kg S) (1 , respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
SEF had the greatest sulfur agronomic efficiency in 2008, at 22.5 kg grain per kg S.
- Treatment
- SEFe1
- Outcome
- agronomic efficiency of Se1
- Direction
- greateste1
- Value
- 22.5 kg grain (kg S) (1e1
- Qualifier
- 2008e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“The agronomic efficiency of S (yield per unit applied) was greatest for SEF in 2006 and 2008 (12.3 and 22.5 kg grain (kg S) (1 , respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors conclude sulfur may become limiting for maize, especially when stover is harvested for bioenergy.
- Outcome
- S may become a limiting nutrient for maizee1
- Qualifier
- especially if maize stover is harvested as a bio(energy feedstocke1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“maize (Zea mays L.)”
e1“S may become a limiting nutrient for maize, especially if maize stover is harvested as a bio(energy feedstock”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 69 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
78 papers more in this group
See all 82 papers →sulfur atom · quality: grain · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.