Paper · 1978 · Index of Texas Archaeology Open Access Grey Literature from the Lone Star State

Zinc Uptake in Loblolly Pine Seedlings

Victor Zillmer

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
0
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Zinc concentrations in the root, terminal growth, stem, and needles of loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) were measured in 72 seedlings grown in washed sand, fertilized with Zn(N03)2. Zinc treatment periods were early spring, late spring, and summer. Zinc uptake was the greatest in early spring. Zinc nitrate fertilizer and remaining soil zinc at treatments end had no effect on mycorrhizae, height, or diameter growth. Linear and multiple regressions were derived using residual soil zinc and treatment zinc that can predict zinc concentrations in different plant parts that have r values from .7440 to .8170. Linear regressions for the prediction of zinc concentrations in different plant parts from leaf zinc concentration have r values from .7694 to .9146.

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 6

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Loblolly pine zinc uptake was greatest in early spring.

Taxon
loblolly pinePinus taedat0
Outcome
Zinc uptakee0
Direction
greateste0
Setting
early springe0

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

Pinus taeda
Pinus taeda · TaxonWoodlot · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Zinc uptake was the greatest in early spring.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 247–292 · show in text ↑
t0

“Loblolly Pine”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–28 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc nitrate fertilizer and residual soil zinc had no effect on mycorrhizae.

Taxon
loblolly pinePinus taedat0
Treatment
Zinc nitrate fertilizere0
Outcome
mycorrhizaee0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Pinus taeda
Pinus taeda · TaxonWoodlot · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Zinc nitrate fertilizer and remaining soil zinc at treatments end had no effect on mycorrhizae, height, or diameter growth.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 293–416 · show in text ↑
t0

“Loblolly Pine”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–28 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc nitrate fertilizer and residual soil zinc had no effect on height.

Taxon
loblolly pinePinus taedat0
Treatment
Zinc nitrate fertilizere0
Outcome
heighte0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Pinus taeda
Pinus taeda · TaxonWoodlot · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Zinc nitrate fertilizer and remaining soil zinc at treatments end had no effect on mycorrhizae, height, or diameter growth.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 293–416 · show in text ↑
t0

“Loblolly Pine”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–28 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc nitrate fertilizer and residual soil zinc had no effect on diameter growth.

Taxon
loblolly pinePinus taedat0
Treatment
Zinc nitrate fertilizere0
Outcome
diameter growthe0
Direction
no effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Pinus taeda
Pinus taeda · TaxonWoodlot · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Zinc nitrate fertilizer and remaining soil zinc at treatments end had no effect on mycorrhizae, height, or diameter growth.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 293–416 · show in text ↑
t0

“Loblolly Pine”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–28 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Regressions using soil and treatment zinc predicted plant-part zinc with r values .7440 to .8170.

Taxon
loblolly pinePinus taedat0
Outcome
predict zinc concentrations in different plant partse0
Value
.7440 to .8170e0

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

Pinus taeda
Pinus taeda · TaxonWoodlot · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Linear and multiple regressions were derived using residual soil zinc and treatment zinc that can predict zinc concentrations in different plant parts that have r values from .7440 to .8170.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 417–607 · show in text ↑
t0

“Loblolly Pine”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–28 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf zinc regressions predicted plant-part zinc with r values .7694 to .9146.

Taxon
loblolly pinePinus taedat0
Outcome
prediction of zinc concentrations in different plant partse0
Value
.7694 to .9146e0

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

Pinus taeda
Pinus taeda · TaxonWoodlot · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Linear regressions for the prediction of zinc concentrations in different plant parts from leaf zinc concentration have r values from .7694 to .9146.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 608–757 · show in text ↑
t0

“Loblolly Pine”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–28 · show in text ↑

fertilization · growth · Pinus taeda (loblolly pine)Positive and negative results

30 papers: 26 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 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.