Paper · 2018 · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

Unprecedented Synergistic Effects of Nanoscale Nutrients on Growth, Productivity of Sweet Sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench], and Nutrient Biofortification

Ramapuram Naseeruddin; Vupprucherla Sumathi; Tollamadugu N. V. K. V. Prasad; et al.

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
32
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Evidence-based synergistic effects of nanoscale materials (size of <100 nm in at least one dimension) were scantly documented in agriculture at field scale. Herein, we report for the first time on effects of nanoscale zinc oxide (n-ZnO), calcium oxide (n-CaO), and magnesium oxide (n-MgO) on growth and productivity of sweet sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. A modified sol-gel method was used to prepare nanoscale materials under study. Characterization was performed using transmission and scanning electron microscopies, X-ray diffraction, and dynamic light scattering. Average sizes (25, 53.7, and 53.5 nm) and ζ potentials (-10.9, -28.2, and -16.2 mV) of n-ZnO, n-CaO, and n-MgO were measured, respectively. The significant grain yield (17.8 and 14.2%), cane yield (7.2 and 8.0%), juice yield (10 and 12%), and higher sucrose yield (21.8 and 20.9%) were recorded with the application of nanoscale materials in the years 2014 and 2015, respectively. Nutrient uptake was significant with foliar application of nanoscale nutrients.

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 resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Application of nanoscale materials increased grain yield of sweet sorghum (17.8 and 14.2% in 2014 and 2015)

Taxon
sweet sorghume0
Treatment
application of nanoscale materialse1
Outcome
grain yielde1
Direction
increaseinferrede1
Value
17.8 and 14.2%e1
Qualifier
in the years 2014 and 2015e1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“growth and productivity of sweet sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–362 · show in text ↑
e1

“The significant grain yield (17.8 and 14.2%), cane yield (7.2 and 8.0%), juice yield (10 and 12%), and higher sucrose yield (21.8 and 20.9%) were recorded with the application of nanoscale materials in the years 2014 and 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–943 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Application of nanoscale materials increased cane yield of sweet sorghum (7.2 and 8.0% in 2014 and 2015)

Taxon
sweet sorghume0
Treatment
application of nanoscale materialse1
Outcome
cane yielde1
Direction
increaseinferrede1
Value
7.2 and 8.0%e1
Qualifier
in the years 2014 and 2015e1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“growth and productivity of sweet sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–362 · show in text ↑
e1

“The significant grain yield (17.8 and 14.2%), cane yield (7.2 and 8.0%), juice yield (10 and 12%), and higher sucrose yield (21.8 and 20.9%) were recorded with the application of nanoscale materials in the years 2014 and 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–943 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Application of nanoscale materials increased juice yield of sweet sorghum (10 and 12% in 2014 and 2015)

Taxon
sweet sorghume0
Treatment
application of nanoscale materialse1
Outcome
juice yielde1
Direction
increaseinferrede1
Value
10 and 12%e1
Qualifier
in the years 2014 and 2015e1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“growth and productivity of sweet sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–362 · show in text ↑
e1

“The significant grain yield (17.8 and 14.2%), cane yield (7.2 and 8.0%), juice yield (10 and 12%), and higher sucrose yield (21.8 and 20.9%) were recorded with the application of nanoscale materials in the years 2014 and 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–943 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Application of nanoscale materials gave higher sucrose yield in sweet sorghum (21.8 and 20.9% in 2014 and 2015)

Taxon
sweet sorghume0
Treatment
application of nanoscale materialse1
Outcome
sucrose yielde1
Direction
highere1
Value
21.8 and 20.9%e1
Qualifier
in the years 2014 and 2015e1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“growth and productivity of sweet sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–362 · show in text ↑
e1

“The significant grain yield (17.8 and 14.2%), cane yield (7.2 and 8.0%), juice yield (10 and 12%), and higher sucrose yield (21.8 and 20.9%) were recorded with the application of nanoscale materials in the years 2014 and 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 718–943 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar application of nanoscale nutrients significantly increased nutrient uptake in sweet sorghum

Taxon
sweet sorghume0
Treatment
foliar application of nanoscale nutrientse2
Outcome
Nutrient uptakee2

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0

“growth and productivity of sweet sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 292–362 · show in text ↑
e2

“Nutrient uptake was significant with foliar application of nanoscale nutrients”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 959–1037 · show in text ↑

application · nutrient: content · SorghumPositive and negative results

24 papers: 23 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 papers →

nanoparticle · yield · SorghumPositive and negative results

31 papers: 29 positive, 2 negative or no effect

28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

27 papers more in this group

See all 31 papers →

nanoparticle · nutrient: content · SorghumResults agree

12 papers: 12 positive, 0 negative or no effect

11 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.