Abstract
Fertilization may affect the relative competitive ability of weeds and crops if the growth response to fertilizer differs among species. Greenhouse studies were conducted to evaluate the relative biomass yield response of 19 weed species and the crops canola (Brassica napus L.) and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) to potassium (K) and sulphur (S) fertilization. Seven weed species showed a significant increase in biomass production at 6 wk with K fertilization, but biomass production of canola and wheat did not increase with K addition. Sulphur fertilizer increased the biomass production of canola, flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.), three of the four Cruciferae species evaluated, as well as that of hairy nightshade (Solanum sarrachoides Sendtner), round-leaved mallow (Malva pusilla Sm.) and stork’s-bill [Erodium cirutarium (L.) L’Her. Ex. Ait.]. Sulphur fertilizer did not increase the biomass production of spring wheat or of any grass weed species. The data from the greenhouse study support the concept that fertilization may shift the relative competition between a crop and the weed population if the weeds are more responsive than the crop to the type of fertilizer applied. However, this concept should be tested under field conditions. Key words: Integrated weed management, sulphur, potassium
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Seven weed species significantly increased biomass with potassium fertilizer.
- Taxon
- canola
.jpg?width=60)
Brassica napus var. napuse0e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Seven weed species showed a significant increase in biomass production at 6 wk with K fertilization”
e1“crops canola (Brassica napus L.) and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Canola biomass did not increase with potassium addition.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- K additione0
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“biomass production of canola and wheat did not increase with K addition”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat biomass did not increase with potassium addition.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Treatment
- K additione0
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“biomass production of canola and wheat did not increase with K addition”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer increased canola biomass.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer increased the biomass production of canola”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer increased flixweed biomass.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Interactor
- flixweede0weed
- Outcome
- biomass production of canola, flixweede0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer increased the biomass production of canola, flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer increased wild mustard biomass.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Interactor
- wild mustarde0weed
- Outcome
- biomass production of canola, flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) and wild mustarde0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer increased the biomass production of canola, flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer increased hairy nightshade biomass.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Interactor
- hairy nightshadee0weed
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer increased the biomass production of canola, flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.), three of the four Cruciferae species evaluated, as well as that of hairy nightshade (Solanum sarrachoides Sendtner)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer increased round-leaved mallow biomass.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Interactor
- round-leaved mallowe0weed
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer increased the biomass production of canola, flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.), three of the four Cruciferae species evaluated, as well as that of hairy nightshade (Solanum sarrachoides Sendtner), round-leaved mallow (Malva pusilla Sm.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer increased stork’s-bill biomass.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Interactor
- stork’s-bille0weed
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer increased the biomass production of canola, flixweed (Descurainia sophia L.) and wild mustard (Sinapis arvensis L.), three of the four Cruciferae species evaluated, as well as that of hairy nightshade (Solanum sarrachoides Sendtner), round-leaved mallow (Malva pusilla Sm.) and stork’s-bill [Erodium cirutarium (L.) L’Her. Ex. Ait.]”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer did not increase spring wheat biomass.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer did not increase the biomass production of spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilizer did not increase biomass of any grass weed species.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizere0
- Interactor
- grass weed speciese0weed
- Outcome
- biomass productione0
- Direction
- did not increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilizer did not increase the biomass production of spring wheat or of any grass weed species.”
Claim · model-written summary
The greenhouse data suggest fertilizer can shift relative weed–crop competition when weeds respond more than the crop.
- Taxon
- crope0
- Treatment
- fertilizatione0
- Interactor
- weed populatione0weed
- Outcome
- relative competition between a crop and the weed populatione0
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“fertilization may shift the relative competition between a crop and the weed population if the weeds are more responsive than the crop to the type of fertilizer applied.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend field testing the competition concept.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0e1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“this concept should be tested under field conditions.”
e1“crops canola (Brassica napus L.) and spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”
The same questions in other papers
sulfur atom · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results differ
48 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
55 papers more in this group
See all 59 papers →sulfur atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
144 papers more in this group
See all 148 papers →potassium · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 42 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 papers →potassium · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 227 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
253 papers more in this group
See all 257 papers →fertilization · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
336 papers in the same direction as this paper · 37 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
374 papers more in this group
See all 378 papers →fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- no effect
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.