Paper · 2002 · Acta Horticulturae

FOLIAR FERTILIZATION: A VALID ALTERNATIVE FOR OLIVE CULTIVAR

P. Toscano; G. Godino; T. Belfiore; et al.

5
claims
9
verbatim quotes
19
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

From 1997 to 2000 a nutrition experiment was conducted to test the effects, on olive trees (cv.Carolea), of different fertilizers quantities and application methods. The fertilization to soil was made once, at bud break in spring, whereas foliar treatments were repeated four times: before flowering; after fruit set; at pit hardening and at the end of summer, before veraison. Parameters determined include the following: growth rate; percentages of flower bud differentiation; percentages of ovary abortion; fruit set; summer fruit drop and yield at harvest. In order to evaluate the nutritional status of trees, samples of leaves were analysed in April, July and November From the first two years, the trees fertilized with foliar sprays showed an increase in vegetative parameters and yield. From the third year, applications of only foliar fertilizers gave worse results than the fertilization to soil, demonstrating the necessity of fertilizer application to roots. The foliar application of macro-elements increased the productivity of trees, both as an addition to the fertilization to soil and, to a lesser extent, as alternative to it. This suggests that foliar fertilization can be used as a cheap and viable alternative for olive production.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar sprays on olive trees (cv. Carolea) increased vegetative parameters and yield in the first two years.

Taxon
oliveOlea europaeae1
Material
cv.Caroleae1
Treatment
foliar sprayse2
Outcome
vegetative parameters and yielde2
Direction
increasee2
Qualifier
From the first two yearse2

Not reportedComparator

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“on olive trees (cv.Carolea)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 76–103 · show in text ↑
e2

“From the first two years, the trees fertilized with foliar sprays showed an increase in vegetative parameters and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 675–794 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Applying only foliar fertilizers from the third year gave worse results than soil fertilization.

Taxon
oliveOlea europaeae2
Treatment
applications of only foliar fertilizerse1
Outcome
resultse1
Direction
worsee1
Qualifier
From the third yeare1
Comparator
fertilization to soile1

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“From the third year, applications of only foliar fertilizers gave worse results than the fertilization to soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 796–906 · show in text ↑
e2

“on olive trees (cv.Carolea)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 76–103 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The olive results demonstrate the necessity of fertilizer application to roots.

Taxon
oliveOlea europaeae2
Outcome
fertilizer application to rootse1

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“demonstrating the necessity of fertilizer application to roots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 908–970 · show in text ↑
e2

“on olive trees (cv.Carolea)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 76–103 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar application of macro-elements increased olive tree productivity as an addition to soil fertilization and, to a lesser extent, as an alternative to it.

Taxon
oliveOlea europaeae2
Treatment
foliar application of macro-elementse1
Outcome
productivity of treese1
Direction
increasede1
Qualifier
to a lesser extent, as alternative to ite1
Comparator
the fertilization to soile1

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“The foliar application of macro-elements increased the productivity of trees, both as an addition to the fertilization to soil and, to a lesser extent, as alternative to it”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 972–1144 · show in text ↑
e2

“on olive trees (cv.Carolea)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 76–103 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fertilization can be used as a cheap and viable alternative for olive production.

Taxon
oliveOlea europaeae1
Outcome
foliar fertilization can be used as a cheap and viable alternative for olive productione1

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

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“foliar fertilization can be used as a cheap and viable alternative for olive production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1165–1252 · show in text ↑

application · yield · Olea europaea (common olive)Positive and negative results

36 papers: 35 positive, 1 negative or no effect

34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

32 papers more in this group

See all 36 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.