Paper · 2014

Effect of Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn Foliar Application on Productivity and Quality of Some Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)

M. S. Mer; Haggan Eman Ama

15
claims
52
verbatim quotes
19
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

A B S T R A C T Two field experiments were conducted in the successive winter seasons 2011/2012 and 2012/2013 at the Agricultural Experiment and Research Station, Faculty of Agriculture, Cairo University to study the effect of Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn foliar application on yield and quality of four wheat cultivars (Sids 13, Sakha 94, Misr 1 and Gemeiza 7 ). A spilt-plot design in a randomized complete block design with three replications was used. Results showed that foliar application by all micronutrients gave significant effect on yield traits and protein content in both seasons compared with control treatment. Moreover, foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn) produced the highest values of plant height (85.03 and 87.17 cm), tillers number m -2 (318.4 and 329.3), spikes number m -2 (279.33 and 282.9), spike length (9.32 and 9.56 cm), number of spikelets spike -1 (16.26 and 16.37), number of grains spike -1 (39.73 and 40.98), 1000-grain weight (42.50 and 43.26 g), grain yield (6.270 and 6.400 ton ha -1 ) , straw yield (12.58 and 12.77 ton ha -1 ), biological yield (18.84 and 19.17 ton ha -1 ) and harvest index (33.21 and 33.36 %), respectively, in both seasons followed by Zn foliar application followed by Mn foliar application followed by Fe foliar application then Cu foliar application. Among wheat cultivars Sids 13 cultivar ranked 1 st in all yield traits and protein content in both seasons followed by Misr 1 followed by Gemeiza 7 cultivar. Howeve, Sakha 94 gave the lowest values of yield traits and protein content. It concluded that sowing Sids 13 cultivar with foliar application micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn) produce

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 15

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Micronutrient foliar applications significantly affected wheat yield traits and protein content versus control in both seasons.

Treatment
foliar application by all micronutrientse0
Outcome
yield traits and protein contente0
Comparator
control treatmente0

Not reportedDirection

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application by all micronutrients gave significant effect on yield traits and protein content in both seasons compared with control treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 462–610 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat plant height in the two seasons: 85.03 and 87.17 cm.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
plant heighte1
Direction
higheste2
Value
85.03 and 87.17 cme1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“plant height (85.03 and 87.17 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 720–753 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat tillers number m -2 in the two seasons: 318.4 and 329.3.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
tillers number m -2e1
Direction
higheste2
Value
318.4 and 329.3e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“tillers number m -2 (318.4 and 329.3)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 755–792 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat spikes number m -2 in the two seasons: 279.33 and 282.9.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
spikes number m -2e1
Direction
higheste2
Value
279.33 and 282.9e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“spikes number m -2 (279.33 and 282.9)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 794–831 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat spike length in the two seasons: 9.32 and 9.56 cm.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
spike lengthe1
Direction
higheste2
Value
9.32 and 9.56 cme1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“spike length (9.32 and 9.56 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 833–864 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat number of spikelets spike -1 in the two seasons: 16.26 and 16.37.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
number of spikelets spike -1e1
Direction
higheste2
Value
16.26 and 16.37e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“number of spikelets spike -1 (16.26 and 16.37)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 866–912 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat number of grains spike -1 in the two seasons: 39.73 and 40.98.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
number of grains spike -1e1
Direction
higheste2
Value
39.73 and 40.98e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“number of grains spike -1 (39.73 and 40.98)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 914–957 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat 1000-grain weight in the two seasons: 42.50 and 43.26 g.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
1000-grain weighte1
Direction
higheste2
Value
42.50 and 43.26 ge1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“1000-grain weight (42.50 and 43.26 g)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 959–996 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat grain yield in the two seasons: 6.270 and 6.400 ton ha -1.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
grain yielde1
Direction
higheste2
Value
6.270 and 6.400 ton ha -1e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“grain yield (6.270 and 6.400 ton ha -1)”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 998–1038 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat straw yield in the two seasons: 12.58 and 12.77 ton ha -1.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
straw yielde1
Direction
higheste2
Value
12.58 and 12.77 ton ha -1e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“straw yield (12.58 and 12.77 ton ha -1)”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 1041–1081 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat biological yield in the two seasons: 18.84 and 19.17 ton ha -1.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
biological yielde1
Direction
higheste2
Value
18.84 and 19.17 ton ha -1e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“biological yield (18.84 and 19.17 ton ha -1)”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · abstract, characters 1083–1128 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined micronutrient foliar application gave the highest wheat harvest index in the two seasons: 33.21 and 33.36 %.

Treatment
foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)e0
Outcome
harvest indexe1
Direction
higheste2
Value
33.21 and 33.36 %e1

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“foliar application wit combination of micronutrients (Cu+Fe+Mn+Zn)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 622–688 · show in text ↑
e1

“harvest index (33.21 and 33.36 %)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1166 · show in text ↑
e2

“produced the highest values of plant height”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 689–732 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zn, Mn, Fe, and Cu foliar applications followed the combination in that order for the reported yield traits.

Outcome
Zn foliar application followed by Mn foliar application followed by Fe foliar application then Cu foliar applicatione0

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“followed by Zn foliar application followed by Mn foliar application followed by Fe foliar application then Cu foliar application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1198–1326 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sids 13 ranked first for yield traits and protein content in both seasons, followed by Misr 1 and Gemeiza 7.

Material
Sids 13e0
Outcome
yield traits and protein contente0
Direction
ranked 1 ste0

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“Sids 13 cultivar ranked 1 st in all yield traits and protein content in both seasons followed by Misr 1 followed by Gemeiza 7 cultivar”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1350–1484 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sakha 94 had the lowest yield traits and protein content.

Material
Sakha 94e0
Outcome
yield traits and protein contente0
Direction
loweste0

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

t0

“Wheat Cultivars (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 80–118 · show in text ↑
e0

“Sakha 94 gave the lowest values of yield traits and protein content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1494–1561 · show in text ↑

manganese atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

32 papers: 24 positive, 8 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

28 papers more in this group

See all 32 papers →

iron atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

54 papers: 41 positive, 13 negative or no effect

40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

50 papers more in this group

See all 54 papers →

copper atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

61 papers: 31 positive, 30 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. negative

57 papers more in this group

See all 61 papers →

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

65 papers: 61 positive, 4 negative or no effect

60 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

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

61 papers more in this group

See all 65 papers →

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

75 papers: 63 positive, 12 negative or no effect

62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

71 papers more in this group

See all 75 papers →

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

99 papers: 92 positive, 7 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

95 papers more in this group

See all 99 papers →

zinc atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

200 papers: 155 positive, 45 negative or no effect

154 papers in the same direction as this paper · 43 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
    Wheat plants with low Mn or low Zn supply showed no growth differences from controls at the three harvests.

    Distribution and remobilization of Zn and Mn during grain development in wheat · 1994 · compared with controls (sufficient Zn and Mn)

    Opposite directionAbout lacking this nutrient, so it counts the other way round

  3. negative

196 papers more in this group

See all 200 papers →

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

511 papers: 456 positive, 55 negative or no effect

455 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

507 papers more in this group

See all 511 papers →

8 of 12 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.