Paper · 2017 · Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental

Phosphorus fertilization in sugarcane cultivation under different soil managements

Paulo R. de Sousa Junior; Caio A. C. G. Brunharo; Carlos E. A. Furlani; et al.

3
claims
8
verbatim quotes
17
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

ABSTRACT Soil preparation along with its chemical adjustment is the most important step in sugarcane plantation, especially because it provides proper conditions for plant development. The objective of the present research was to evaluate sugarcane response to the application of different phosphorus doses and their location, associated with both minimum soil tillage and conventional soil tillage. The experiment was conducted in a split-split-plot randomized block design, where the main plots were subjected to soil managements (minimum soil tillage or conventional soil tillage), the subplots to phosphorus doses in total area, and the sub-sub-plots to phosphorus doses in the crop rows. The evaluated variables were soil chemical parameters, sugarcane production and sugar production. Minimum tillage led to larger phosphorus accumulation and higher percentage of exchangeable bases in the soil, whereas the highest P dose in total area in the crop rows led to reduction of sugar production.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum tillage led to larger phosphorus accumulation in the soil than conventional soil tillage.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
Minimum tillagee0
Outcome
phosphorus accumulatione0
Direction
largere0
Qualifier
in the soile0
Comparator
conventional soil tillagee2

Verbatim

t0

“Phosphorus fertilization in sugarcane cultivation under different soil managements”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–82 · show in text ↑
e0

“Minimum tillage led to larger phosphorus accumulation and higher percentage of exchangeable bases in the soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 791–900 · show in text ↑
e2

“associated with both minimum soil tillage and conventional soil tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 327–398 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Minimum tillage led to a higher percentage of exchangeable bases in the soil than conventional soil tillage.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
Minimum tillagee0
Outcome
percentage of exchangeable basese0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
in the soile0
Comparator
conventional soil tillagee2

Verbatim

t0

“Phosphorus fertilization in sugarcane cultivation under different soil managements”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–82 · show in text ↑
e0

“Minimum tillage led to larger phosphorus accumulation and higher percentage of exchangeable bases in the soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 791–900 · show in text ↑
e2

“associated with both minimum soil tillage and conventional soil tillage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 327–398 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The highest P dose in total area in the crop rows reduced sugar production.

Taxon
sugarcanet0
Treatment
highest P dose in total area in the crop rowse1
Outcome
sugar productione1
Direction
reductione1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

t0

“Phosphorus fertilization in sugarcane cultivation under different soil managements”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–82 · show in text ↑
e1

“the highest P dose in total area in the crop rows led to reduction of sugar production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–996 · show in text ↑

phosphorus · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results

57 papers: 55 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 55 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

53 papers more in this group

See all 57 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.