Abstract
Abstract In order to investigate the effect of iron chelate and plant growth promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) on maize, an experiment was conducted as completely randomized block factorial design with three replicates. The first factor included of bacterial strain: S 1 = Control (without use of bacteria), S 2 =Azotobacter chroococcum and S 3 = Azospirillum brasilens and the second factor included of iron chelate: F 1 = Control, F 2 = soil application of Fe chelate, F 3 = foliar application of Fe chelate, F 4 = soil application of nano Fe chelate and F 5 = foliar application of nano Fe chelate. The results showed that the highest grain yield and guaiacol peroxidase (GPX) enzymes activity were obtained at the S 3 F 5 treatment and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) at S 1 F 5 treatment. Except the content of phosphorus in leaves and carotenoid, PGPR had significant effect on biological yield, the content of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’, yield components (number of seed per row of the ear, number of rows per ear and thousand seed weight) and nutrient elements in both the seeds and leaves. However, iron chelate, increased the yield components, but among the iron chelate treatments, the highest amount of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’ in leaves and phosphorus in seeds were obtained at F 5 . These results suggested that foliar application of nano Fe chelate and Azospirillum brasilens could be improvement of maize plant productivity.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
The highest grain yield was obtained with the S 3 F 5 treatment.
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e1“The results showed that the highest grain yield and guaiacol peroxidase (GPX) enzymes activity were obtained at the S 3 F 5 treatment and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) at S 1 F 5 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest guaiacol peroxidase (GPX) activity was obtained with the S 3 F 5 treatment.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e1“The results showed that the highest grain yield and guaiacol peroxidase (GPX) enzymes activity were obtained at the S 3 F 5 treatment and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) at S 1 F 5 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activity was obtained with the S 1 F 5 treatment.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e1“The results showed that the highest grain yield and guaiacol peroxidase (GPX) enzymes activity were obtained at the S 3 F 5 treatment and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) at S 1 F 5 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR had a significant effect on biological yield in maize.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e2“PGPR had significant effect on biological yield, the content of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’, yield components (number of seed per row of the ear, number of rows per ear and thousand seed weight) and nutrient elements in both the seeds and leaves”
e5“S 1 = Control (without use of bacteria)”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR had a significant effect on the chlorophyll a and b content in maize.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e2“PGPR had significant effect on biological yield, the content of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’, yield components (number of seed per row of the ear, number of rows per ear and thousand seed weight) and nutrient elements in both the seeds and leaves”
e5“S 1 = Control (without use of bacteria)”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR had a significant effect on yield components in maize.
- Treatment
- PGPRe2
- Outcome
- yield componentse2
- Qualifier
- number of seed per row of the ear, number of rows per ear and thousand seed weighte2
- Comparator
- Control (without use of bacteria)e5
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e2“PGPR had significant effect on biological yield, the content of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’, yield components (number of seed per row of the ear, number of rows per ear and thousand seed weight) and nutrient elements in both the seeds and leaves”
e5“S 1 = Control (without use of bacteria)”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR had a significant effect on nutrient elements in the seeds and leaves of maize.
- Treatment
- PGPRe2
- Outcome
- nutrient elementse2
- Qualifier
- in both the seeds and leavese2
- Comparator
- Control (without use of bacteria)e5
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e2“PGPR had significant effect on biological yield, the content of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’, yield components (number of seed per row of the ear, number of rows per ear and thousand seed weight) and nutrient elements in both the seeds and leaves”
e5“S 1 = Control (without use of bacteria)”
Claim · model-written summary
PGPR had no significant effect on the phosphorus content in leaves or on carotenoid in maize.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e4“Except the content of phosphorus in leaves and carotenoid, PGPR had significant effect”
Claim · model-written summary
Iron chelate increased the yield components of maize.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e6“However, iron chelate, increased the yield components”
e7“F 1 = Control”
Claim · model-written summary
Among iron chelate treatments, the highest chlorophyll a and b in leaves was obtained with the F 5 treatment.
- Treatment
- F 5e0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’ in leavese0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Comparator
- iron chelate treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e0“among the iron chelate treatments, the highest amount of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’ in leaves and phosphorus in seeds were obtained at F 5”
Claim · model-written summary
Among iron chelate treatments, the highest phosphorus in seeds was obtained with the F 5 treatment.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Physiological Characteristics in Maize”
e0“among the iron chelate treatments, the highest amount of chlorophyll ‘a’ and ‘b’ in leaves and phosphorus in seeds were obtained at F 5”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar application of nano Fe chelate and Azospirillum brasilens could improve maize plant productivity.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“foliar application of nano Fe chelate and Azospirillum brasilens could be improvement of maize plant productivity”
The same questions in other papers
iron chelate · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
inoculation · physiology: pigments · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 85 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
91 papers more in this group
See all 95 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.