Paper · 2013 · Hunan Agricultural Sciences

Effects of Different Fertilization Methods on Yield and Fertilizer Use Efficiency of Medium Rice

Yao Ju

6
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A field plot experiment was conducted to study effects of formula fertilization and local conventional fertilization on yield and fertilizer use efficiency of medium rice variety Yangliangyou No.6 in the river sand mud field in Cili County. The results showed that in comparison with non-fertilization, the yield of Yangliangyou No.6 with formula fertilization and conventional fertilization increased by 86.04% and 82.49%, respectively; the fertilizer use efficiency of N, P and K with formula fertilization was 34.85%, 18.77% and 39.59%, respectively, which increased by 4.71, 1.12 and 0.87 percentage points. Therefore, in comparison with conventional fertilization, formula fertilization is benefit for increasing absorption of N, P and K fertilizer by grain and stem of Yangliangyou No.6.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Formula fertilization increased rice yield 86.04% relative to no fertilization.

Material
Yangliangyou No.6e0
Treatment
formula fertilizatione0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
86.04%e0
Comparator
non-fertilizatione1

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the yield of Yangliangyou No.6 with formula fertilization and conventional fertilization increased by 86.04% and 82.49%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 303–436 · show in text ↑
e1

“in comparison with non-fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–301 · show in text ↑
t0

“Medium Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Conventional fertilization increased rice yield 82.49% relative to no fertilization.

Material
Yangliangyou No.6e0
Treatment
conventional fertilizatione0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
82.49%e0
Comparator
non-fertilizatione1

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the yield of Yangliangyou No.6 with formula fertilization and conventional fertilization increased by 86.04% and 82.49%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 303–436 · show in text ↑
e1

“in comparison with non-fertilization”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 265–301 · show in text ↑
t0

“Medium Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Formula fertilization yielded 34.85% N fertilizer use efficiency, up 4.71 percentage points.

Treatment
formula fertilizatione0
Outcome
fertilizer use efficiency of Ne0
Direction
increasede0
Value
34.85%e0
Qualifier
4.71e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the fertilizer use efficiency of N, P and K with formula fertilization was 34.85%, 18.77% and 39.59%, respectively, which increased by 4.71, 1.12 and 0.87 percentage points”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 438–610 · show in text ↑
t0

“Medium Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Formula fertilization yielded 18.77% P fertilizer use efficiency, up 1.12 percentage points.

Treatment
formula fertilizatione0
Outcome
fertilizer use efficiency of N, Pe0
Direction
increasede0
Value
18.77%e0
Qualifier
1.12e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the fertilizer use efficiency of N, P and K with formula fertilization was 34.85%, 18.77% and 39.59%, respectively, which increased by 4.71, 1.12 and 0.87 percentage points”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 438–610 · show in text ↑
t0

“Medium Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Formula fertilization yielded 39.59% K fertilizer use efficiency, up 0.87 percentage points.

Treatment
formula fertilizatione0
Outcome
fertilizer use efficiency of N, P and Ke0
Direction
increasede0
Value
39.59%e0
Qualifier
0.87 percentage pointse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the fertilizer use efficiency of N, P and K with formula fertilization was 34.85%, 18.77% and 39.59%, respectively, which increased by 4.71, 1.12 and 0.87 percentage points”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 438–610 · show in text ↑
t0

“Medium Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–96 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Formula fertilization benefited N, P and K absorption by rice grain and stem relative to conventional fertilization.

Material
Yangliangyou No.6e0
Treatment
formula fertilizatione0
Outcome
absorption of N, P and K fertilizer by grain and steme0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
conventional fertilizatione0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in comparison with conventional fertilization, formula fertilization is benefit for increasing absorption of N, P and K fertilizer by grain and stem of Yangliangyou No.6”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 623–792 · show in text ↑
t0

“Medium Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 85–96 · show in text ↑

fertilization · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

220 papers: 202 positive, 18 negative or no effect

201 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

216 papers more in this group

See all 220 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

993 papers: 932 positive, 61 negative or no effect

931 papers in the same direction as this paper · 56 in the opposite direction · 5 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

989 papers more in this group

See all 993 papers →

fertilization · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

3,455 papers: 3,183 positive, 272 negative or no effect

3,182 papers in the same direction as this paper · 207 in the opposite direction · 65 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

3,451 papers more in this group

See all 3,455 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.