Abstract
Average grain yield of 3.93 t/ha in Croatia in the last decade (1991–2001) indicates that winter wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) is still widely grown under extensive production systems primarily characterized by suboptimal nitrogen fertilization. Therefore, the object of this research was to evaluate the bread-making quality of grain and flour of different wheat cultivars as influenced by cropping intensity and foliar nitrogen application at flowering. A field experiment under two cropping intensities, called intensive and extensive production systems, was conducted in the 1999/2000 growing season at the Faculty of Agriculture in Zagreb. The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %), while it had no effect on gluten index, flour yield and physical grain properties (1000-grain weight, grain length, width and thickness). Under the intensive system, compared to the extensive production system, only softening degree decreased by 29.5 %, which also had positive impact on bread-making quality of wheat. Foliar nitrogen application at flowering additionally improved hectolitre weight (1.1 %), protein content (6.1 %), wet gluten (11.8 %), sedimentation (16.5 %), water absorption (2.5 %) and dough development time (28.4 %). The findings showed that wheat with better bread-making quality might be achieved under intensive production systems, particularly with high nitrogen fertilization rates.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. 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 18
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved hectolitre weight by 1.9 %.
- Taxon
- Wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- hectolitre weighte0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 1.9 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved protein content by 16.9 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- protein contente0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 16.9 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved wet gluten by 59.7 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- wet glutene0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 59.7 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved sedimentation by 67.2 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- sedimentatione0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 67.2 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved falling number by 7.8 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- falling numbere0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 7.8 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved water absorption by 2.0 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- water absorptione0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 2.0 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved dough development time by 78.2 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- dough development timee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 78.2 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved dough stability by 900.0 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- dough stabilitye0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 900.0 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved dough resistance by 138.1%.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- dough resistancee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 138.1%e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive production system improved farinograph quality number by 142.8 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme0
- Outcome
- farinograph quality numbere0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 142.8 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The use of an intensive production system compared to an extensive system significantly improved hectolitre weight (1.9 %), protein content (16.9 %), wet gluten (59.7 %), sedimentation (67.2 %), falling number (7.8 %), water absorption (2.0 %), dough development time (78.2 %), dough stability (900.0 %), dough resistance (138.1%) and farinograph quality number (142.8 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The intensive system did not change gluten index, flour yield, or physical grain properties.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive production systeme1
- Outcome
- gluten index, flour yield and physical grain propertiese0
- Direction
- no effecte0
- Comparator
- extensive systeme1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“while it had no effect on gluten index, flour yield and physical grain properties (1000-grain weight, grain length, width and thickness)”
t0“Wheat”
e1“intensive production system compared to an extensive system”
Claim · model-written summary
intensive system decreased softening degree by 29.5 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- intensive systeme0
- Outcome
- softening degreee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 29.5 %e0
- Comparator
- extensive production systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Under the intensive system, compared to the extensive production system, only softening degree decreased by 29.5 %”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nitrogen at flowering improved hectolitre weight by 1.1 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Foliar nitrogen application at floweringe0
- Outcome
- hectolitre weighte0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 1.1 %e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nitrogen application at flowering additionally improved hectolitre weight (1.1 %), protein content (6.1 %), wet gluten (11.8 %), sedimentation (16.5 %), water absorption (2.5 %) and dough development time (28.4 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nitrogen at flowering improved protein content by 6.1 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Foliar nitrogen application at floweringe0
- Outcome
- protein contente0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 6.1 %e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nitrogen application at flowering additionally improved hectolitre weight (1.1 %), protein content (6.1 %), wet gluten (11.8 %), sedimentation (16.5 %), water absorption (2.5 %) and dough development time (28.4 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nitrogen at flowering improved wet gluten by 11.8 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Foliar nitrogen application at floweringe0
- Outcome
- wet glutene0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 11.8 %e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nitrogen application at flowering additionally improved hectolitre weight (1.1 %), protein content (6.1 %), wet gluten (11.8 %), sedimentation (16.5 %), water absorption (2.5 %) and dough development time (28.4 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nitrogen at flowering improved sedimentation by 16.5 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Foliar nitrogen application at floweringe0
- Outcome
- sedimentatione0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 16.5 %e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nitrogen application at flowering additionally improved hectolitre weight (1.1 %), protein content (6.1 %), wet gluten (11.8 %), sedimentation (16.5 %), water absorption (2.5 %) and dough development time (28.4 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nitrogen at flowering improved water absorption by 2.5 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Foliar nitrogen application at floweringe0
- Outcome
- water absorptione0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 2.5 %e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nitrogen application at flowering additionally improved hectolitre weight (1.1 %), protein content (6.1 %), wet gluten (11.8 %), sedimentation (16.5 %), water absorption (2.5 %) and dough development time (28.4 %)”
t0“Wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar nitrogen at flowering improved dough development time by 28.4 %.
- Taxon
- WheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Foliar nitrogen application at floweringe0
- Outcome
- dough development timee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 28.4 %e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar nitrogen application at flowering additionally improved hectolitre weight (1.1 %), protein content (6.1 %), wet gluten (11.8 %), sedimentation (16.5 %), water absorption (2.5 %) and dough development time (28.4 %)”
t0“Wheat”
The same questions in other papers
nitrogen · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
69 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
92 papers more in this group
See all 96 papers →stage · pest · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
stage · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →application · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →stage · quality: grain · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →stage · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →stage · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →nitrogen · soil: physics · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
37 papers more in this group
See all 41 papers →8 of 15 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.