Paper · 2010

Effect of elemental and soluble sulphur sources on grain yield of wheat (Triticum aestivum L) in Mollisols of Pampas Region of Argentina.

Martín Torres Duggan; Mónica Rodríguez; Raúl S. Lavado; et al.

6
claims
18
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Field experiments were conducted in different sites of the humid area of the Argentine Pampas Region during two successive years. The objective was to evaluate the influence of different sulphur sources (elemental and sulphate form) on grain yield of wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.). This region has a temperate climate; average annual rainfall is 980 mm and mean annual temperature 16°C. The S sources used in the experiments were: micronized elemental sulphur (ES, 95% of S) and standard ammonium sulphate (AS, 21? 0?0+24% of S). A randomized complete block experime ntal design with 4 or 6 replications was used with factorial arrangement. Factor 1 was sulphur source and factor 2 was the S rate. Sulphur rates were 10 and 30 kg/ha (year 1) and 15 and 30 kg/ha (year 2). A check treatment was included. Data were analyzed through factorial analysis of the variance (ANOVA). There was a significative fertilization effect (p<0.05) in 80 % of sites and response was in the range of 231?857 kg/h a (mean response=600 kg/ha) during the first year. During second year a significant response was observed in all sites, with a range of 702?2119 kg/ha (m ean response=1228 kg/ha). As a general trend, no significant source effects on S response were detected. Thus, in most sites S fertilizer effectiveness was not significatively affected by sulphur form or water solubility. However, in few sites, better behavior of S as sulphate was found. There was not S rate effect, and lower rate of S (10 or 15 kg/ha) was enough to provide S for the levels of yields obtained in present experiments.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur fertilization significantly increased wheat grain yield in 80% of sites in the first year, with a mean response of 600 kg/ha over the check.

Treatment
fertilizatione1
Outcome
grain yieldt0
Direction
increaseinferrede1
Value
600 kg/hae1
Qualifier
p<0.05e1
Comparator
check treatmente2
Setting
Argentine Pampas Regione0

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

t0

“grain yield of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–71 · show in text ↑
e0

“Field experiments were conducted in different sites of the humid area of the Argentine Pampas Region during two successive years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–128 · show in text ↑
e1

“There was a significative fertilization effect (p<0.05) in 80 % of sites and response was in the range of 231?857 kg/h a (mean response=600 kg/ha) during the first year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 875–1043 · show in text ↑
e2

“A check treatment was included”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 772–802 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In the second year sulphur fertilization gave a significant grain yield response in all sites, with a mean response of 1228 kg/ha.

Treatment
different sulphur sourcese7
Outcome
grain yieldt0
Direction
increaseinferrede3
Value
1228 kg/hae3
Comparator
check treatmente2
Setting
Argentine Pampas Regione0

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

t0

“grain yield of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–71 · show in text ↑
e0

“Field experiments were conducted in different sites of the humid area of the Argentine Pampas Region during two successive years”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–128 · show in text ↑
e3

“During second year a significant response was observed in all sites, with a range of 702?2119 kg/ha (m ean response=1228 kg/ha)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1045–1172 · show in text ↑
e7

“different sulphur sources (elemental and sulphate form)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–232 · show in text ↑
e2

“A check treatment was included”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 772–802 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No significant effect of sulphur form on S response was detected as a general trend.

Treatment
sulphur forme7
Outcome
S responsee4

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

t0

“grain yield of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–71 · show in text ↑
e4

“As a general trend, no significant source effects on S response were detected”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1174–1251 · show in text ↑
e7

“S fertilizer effectiveness was not significatively affected by sulphur form or water solubility”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1273–1368 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

In few sites, S applied as sulphate showed better behavior than elemental S.

Treatment
S as sulphatee5
Outcome
behavior of Se5
Direction
bettere5
Qualifier
in few sitese5

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

t0

“grain yield of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–71 · show in text ↑
e5

“However, in few sites, better behavior of S as sulphate was found”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1370–1435 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

There was no effect of the S rate on the response.

Treatment
S ratee6
Outcome
S rate effecte6

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

t0

“grain yield of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–71 · show in text ↑
e6

“There was not S rate effect, and lower rate of S (10 or 15 kg/ha) was enough to provide S for the levels of yields obtained in present experiments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1437–1583 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

A lower S rate of 10 or 15 kg/ha was enough to supply S for the yield levels obtained.

Outcome
lower rate of Se6
Value
10 or 15 kg/hae6

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

t0

“grain yield of wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–71 · show in text ↑
e6

“There was not S rate effect, and lower rate of S (10 or 15 kg/ha) was enough to provide S for the levels of yields obtained in present experiments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1437–1583 · show in text ↑

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

66 papers: 51 positive, 15 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 51 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

62 papers more in this group

See all 66 papers →

sulfur atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

148 papers: 124 positive, 24 negative or no effect

123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

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

144 papers more in this group

See all 148 papers →

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

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

3,434 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 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.