Paper · 2007 · Journal of Soil and Water Conservation

Effects of Sulphur Application on Carbon and Nitrogen Assimilate Translocation and Grain Yield of Winter Wheat Cultivars with Different Gluten

Zhu Xiao-jie

8
claims
19
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted to investigate the effects of sulphur rates on characteristics of post-anthesis carbon and nitrogen assimilation and transfer, and grain yield,protein and starch contents,using wheat cultivars with different grain protein contents,i.e.Yumai 34(high protein content) and Yumai 50(low protein content).The results showed that,sulphur application of both cultivars increased grain weight and grain nitrogen accumulation of single stem, the transfer amount of dry matter and nitrogen to grains after anthesis and the contribution of transferred dry matter and nitrogen to grain were increased too.Comparing with no sulphur fertilizer application treatment(S1),the yield components with the treatment of 20 kg/hm2 sulphur application of both cultivars were obviously increased,and grain yield was significantly increased by 10.69% and 9.78%,meanwhile the contents of protein and starch were extremely significantly increased.The effects of high rate sulphur application(100 kg/hm2) treatment was inferior to moderate sulphur application(20 kg/hm2) treatment.The result showed that moderate rate of sulphur application could obviously regulate the assimilation and transfer of carbon and nitrogen,and increase grain yield and the accumulation of protein and starch.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur application increased single-stem grain weight and grain nitrogen accumulation in both cultivars.

Treatment
sulphur applicatione0
Outcome
grain weight and grain nitrogen accumulation of single steme0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“sulphur application of both cultivars increased grain weight and grain nitrogen accumulation of single stem”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 357–464 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur application increased post-anthesis transfer of dry matter and nitrogen to grains.

Treatment
sulphur applicatione1
Outcome
transfer amount of dry matter and nitrogen to grains after anthesise0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the transfer amount of dry matter and nitrogen to grains after anthesis and the contribution of transferred dry matter and nitrogen to grain were increased too”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 466–625 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑
e1

“The results showed that,sulphur application of both cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 333–394 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur application increased the contribution of transferred dry matter and nitrogen to grain.

Treatment
sulphur applicatione1
Outcome
contribution of transferred dry matter and nitrogen to graine0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the contribution of transferred dry matter and nitrogen to grain were increased too”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 542–625 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑
e1

“The results showed that,sulphur application of both cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 333–394 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Applying 20 kg/hm2 sulphur increased yield components relative to no sulphur.

Treatment
20 kg/hm2 sulphur applicatione0
Outcome
yield componentse0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
no sulphur fertilizer application treatment(S1)e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Comparing with no sulphur fertilizer application treatment(S1),the yield components with the treatment of 20 kg/hm2 sulphur application of both cultivars were obviously increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 626–804 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 20 kg/hm2 sulphur, grain yield rose 10.69% in one cultivar relative to no sulphur.

Treatment
20 kg/hm2 sulphur applicatione0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
10.69%e0
Comparator
no sulphur fertilizer application treatment(S1)e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Comparing with no sulphur fertilizer application treatment(S1),the yield components with the treatment of 20 kg/hm2 sulphur application of both cultivars were obviously increased,and grain yield was significantly increased by 10.69% and 9.78%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 626–868 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 20 kg/hm2 sulphur, grain yield rose 9.78% in the other cultivar relative to no sulphur.

Treatment
20 kg/hm2 sulphur applicatione0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
9.78%e0
Comparator
no sulphur fertilizer application treatment(S1)e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Comparing with no sulphur fertilizer application treatment(S1),the yield components with the treatment of 20 kg/hm2 sulphur application of both cultivars were obviously increased,and grain yield was significantly increased by 10.69% and 9.78%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 626–868 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

At 20 kg/hm2 sulphur, grain protein and starch contents rose very significantly.

Treatment
20 kg/hm2 sulphur applicatione1
Outcome
contents of protein and starche0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the contents of protein and starch were extremely significantly increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 879–952 · show in text ↑
e1

“20 kg/hm2 sulphur application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 732–761 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 100 kg/hm2 sulphur rate performed worse than the 20 kg/hm2 rate.

Treatment
high rate sulphur application(100 kg/hm2)e0
Outcome
inferiore0
Direction
inferiore0
Comparator
moderate sulphur application(20 kg/hm2)e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The effects of high rate sulphur application(100 kg/hm2) treatment was inferior to moderate sulphur application(20 kg/hm2) treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 953–1086 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 98–120 · show in text ↑

sulfur atom · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

51 papers: 44 positive, 7 negative or no effect

43 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

47 papers more in this group

See all 51 papers →

sulfur atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

148 papers: 124 positive, 24 negative or no effect

123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

144 papers more in this group

See all 148 papers →

sulfur atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

33 papers: 31 positive, 2 negative or no effect

30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

29 papers more in this group

See all 33 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.