Paper · 2018 · Applied Ecology and Environmental Research

EFFECT OF ZINC AND IRON FOLIAR APPLICATION WITH TWO LEVELS OF IRRIGATION WATER ACIDITY ON THE QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE PARAMETERS OF WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)

E ZANDIPOUR; H AJAM NOROZEI; A BOSTANI

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
5
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

In addition to enhancing wheat's photosynthesis, growth and ability to cope with stress, the foliar application of zinc and iron can play an effective role in improving consumer nutrition. Therefore, the aim of this study was investigation of zinc and iron foliar application in irrigation water acidity on wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). This experiment was conducted as a triple factorial using a randomized complete blocks design with three replications in Tehran, Iran in 2014-15 and 2015-16. The treatments were two irrigation water acidity (pH value = 8.14 and 5), and the foliar application of iron and zinc sulfate (0, 2.5, and 5 g L -1 ). The results revealed that the most grain yield was produced at a pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc application. The main cause for increasing the grain yield was enhancement of spike length, tillers and grains per plant. The greatest grain protein content was measured at a pH value = 5, with a 5 g L -1 zinc application. The maximum grain iron content was calculated at a pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc usage. The highest grain zinc content was obtained at a pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc consumption. The maximum zinc utilization efficiency was observed for the iron control treatment with 5 g L -1 zinc consumption. Therefore, the treatments that were irrigated with water with an acidic pH of 5 along with 5 g L -1 zinc and iron foliar application had the highest yield and the best qualitative traits.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at pH 5 with 5 g L -1 zinc produced the most grain yield.

Treatment
pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc applicatione0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
moste0

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

e0

“The results revealed that the most grain yield was produced at a pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc application.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 646–756 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–165 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors attributed increased grain yield to enhanced spike length, tillers and grains per plant.

Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
increasinge0
Qualifier
enhancement of spike length, tillers and grains per plante0

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

e0

“The main cause for increasing the grain yield was enhancement of spike length, tillers and grains per plant.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 757–865 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–165 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

pH 5 irrigation with 5 g L -1 zinc gave the greatest grain protein content.

Treatment
pH value = 5, with a 5 g L -1 zinc applicatione0
Outcome
grain protein contente0
Direction
greateste0

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

e0

“The greatest grain protein content was measured at a pH value = 5, with a 5 g L -1 zinc application.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 866–966 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–165 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

pH 5 irrigation with 5 g L -1 zinc gave maximum grain iron content.

Treatment
pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc usagee0
Outcome
grain iron contente0
Direction
maximume0

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

e0

“The maximum grain iron content was calculated at a pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc usage.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 967–1057 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–165 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

pH 5 irrigation with 5 g L -1 zinc gave the highest grain zinc content.

Treatment
pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc consumptione0
Outcome
grain zinc contente0
Direction
higheste0

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

e0

“The highest grain zinc content was obtained at a pH value = 5, with 5 g L -1 zinc consumption.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1058–1152 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–165 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The iron control with 5 g L -1 zinc gave maximum zinc utilization efficiency.

Treatment
iron control treatment with 5 g L -1 zinc consumptione0
Outcome
zinc utilization efficiencye0
Direction
maximume0

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

e0

“The maximum zinc utilization efficiency was observed for the iron control treatment with 5 g L -1 zinc consumption.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1153–1268 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–165 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors concluded pH 5 irrigation with 5 g L -1 zinc and iron foliar application gave the highest yield and best qualitative traits.

Treatment
water with an acidic pH of 5 along with 5 g L -1 zinc and iron foliar applicatione0
Outcome
highest yield and the best qualitative traitse0

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

e0

“Therefore, the treatments that were irrigated with water with an acidic pH of 5 along with 5 g L -1 zinc and iron foliar application had the highest yield and the best qualitative traits.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1269–1456 · show in text ↑
t0

“WHEAT (TRITICUM AESTIVUM L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 137–165 · show in text ↑

zinc atom · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

64 papers: 56 positive, 8 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

60 papers more in this group

See all 64 papers →

iron atom · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

74 papers: 61 positive, 13 negative or no effect

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

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

70 papers more in this group

See all 74 papers →

zinc atom · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

380 papers: 347 positive, 33 negative or no effect

346 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

376 papers more in this group

See all 380 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. no effect

507 papers more in this group

See all 511 papers →

ph · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 3 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

ph · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 11 positive, 7 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

ph · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 9 positive, 10 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 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.