Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the effects of the agricultural use of sewage sludge in corn for grain, in the year of application and follow up effect after one and two years after its application. The study was conducted on the variety PR39G12 on the field after the 5-year monoculture corn. Sewage sludge was used in accordance with the Directive of Minister of Environment allowing application of 10 t dry mater per ha-1 once every five years. Fertilization with sludge of maize grown for grain did not cause differences in the growth and development of plants, compared to mineral fertilized objects, as well as did not exceed the limit value for heavy metals content in above-ground plant parts. Maize grown using sewage sludge yielded higher than the objects fertilized with mineral, especially in conditions of extreme drought, which occurred in 2006. Beneficial effect of sewage sludge was maintained in the next two years after application and stabilized the grain yield of maize.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nd. 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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Sludge caused no growth or development difference from mineral fertilizer.
- Treatment
- Fertilization with sludgee0
- Outcome
- growth and development of plantse0
- Direction
- did not cause differencese0
- Comparator
- mineral fertilized objectse0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization with sludge of maize grown for grain did not cause differences in the growth and development of plants, compared to mineral fertilized objects, as well as did not exceed the limit value for heavy metals content in above-ground plant parts.”
Claim · model-written summary
Heavy metals in above ground maize parts did not exceed the limit.
- Organ / stage
- above-ground plant partse0
- Outcome
- heavy metals contente0
- Direction
- did not exceede0
- Comparator
- limit valuee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization with sludge of maize grown for grain did not cause differences in the growth and development of plants, compared to mineral fertilized objects, as well as did not exceed the limit value for heavy metals content in above-ground plant parts.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sludge-fertilized maize yielded more than mineral-fertilized maize, especially under drought.
- Treatment
- sewage sludgee0
- Outcome
- yieldede0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- conditions of extreme droughte0
- Comparator
- objects fertilized with minerale0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize grown using sewage sludge yielded higher than the objects fertilized with mineral, especially in conditions of extreme drought, which occurred in 2006.”
Claim · model-written summary
The benefit of sewage sludge persisted for two years after application.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Beneficial effect of sewage sludge was maintained in the next two years after application and stabilized the grain yield of maize.”
Claim · model-written summary
Sewage sludge stabilized maize grain yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Beneficial effect of sewage sludge was maintained in the next two years after application and stabilized the grain yield of maize.”
The same questions in other papers
organic · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 115 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
125 papers more in this group
See all 129 papers →organic · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
329 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
369 papers more in this group
See all 373 papers →fertilization · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
168 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1,196 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
1,361 papers more in this group
See all 1,365 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.