Paper · 2013

Effects of Sulphate-potassium Magnesium on Sugarcane Yield and Sugar Content for Benefit

Lin Qun-yan

10
claims
10
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Effects of applying of sulphate-potassium magnesium combined nitrogen and phosphate fertilizer on sugarcane yield and sugar content for benefit were studied.The results showed that applying potassium fertilizer could improve yield and quality.Sulphate-potassium magnesium could significantly increase sugarcane yield and sugar content.Compared with potassium chliride and potassium sulfate,the yield was increased by 6.6% and 11.9%,sugar content raised by 0.3% and 0.1%,respectively,the sugar yield was increased by 8.5% and 12.6%,net economic benefit was increased by 7.3% and 19.1%.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher.

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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphate-potassium magnesium significantly increased sugarcane yield.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
Sulphate-potassium magnesiume0
Outcome
sugarcane yielde0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Sulphate-potassium magnesium could significantly increase sugarcane yield and sugar content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 243–334 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphate-potassium magnesium significantly increased sugar content.

Taxon
sugarcanee0
Treatment
Sulphate-potassium magnesiume0
Outcome
sugar contente0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Sulphate-potassium magnesium could significantly increase sugarcane yield and sugar content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 243–334 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane yield rose 6.6% relative to potassium chloride.

Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
6.6%e0
Comparator
potassium chliridee0

Not reportedTaxonTreatment

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with potassium chliride and potassium sulfate,the yield was increased by 6.6% and 11.9%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–431 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugarcane yield rose 11.9% relative to potassium sulfate.

Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
11.9%e0
Comparator
potassium sulfatee0

Not reportedTaxonTreatment

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with potassium chliride and potassium sulfate,the yield was increased by 6.6% and 11.9%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 335–431 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar content rose 0.3% relative to potassium chloride.

Outcome
sugar contente0
Direction
raisede0
Value
0.3%e0

Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0

“sugar content raised by 0.3% and 0.1%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–469 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar content rose 0.1% relative to potassium sulfate.

Outcome
sugar contente0
Direction
raisede0
Value
0.1%e0

Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0

“sugar content raised by 0.3% and 0.1%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 432–469 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar yield increased 8.5% relative to potassium chloride.

Outcome
sugar yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
8.5%e0

Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0

“the sugar yield was increased by 8.5% and 12.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 483–530 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sugar yield increased 12.6% relative to potassium sulfate.

Outcome
sugar yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Value
12.6%e0

Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0

“the sugar yield was increased by 8.5% and 12.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 483–530 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Net economic benefit increased 7.3% relative to potassium chloride.

Outcome
net economic benefite0
Direction
increasede0
Value
7.3%e0

Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0

“net economic benefit was increased by 7.3% and 19.1%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 531–583 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Net economic benefit increased 19.1% relative to potassium sulfate.

Outcome
net economic benefite0
Direction
increasede0
Value
19.1%e0

Not reportedTaxonTreatmentComparator

Verbatim

e0

“net economic benefit was increased by 7.3% and 19.1%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 531–583 · show in text ↑

magnesium atom · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Results differ

9 papers: 6 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

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

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

magnesium atom · quality: sugar starch · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 5 positive, 3 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 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.