Abstract
A field experiment was in Sahl El-Tina site, North Sinai Governorate, during the two successive seasons (2015/16 and 2016/17) to study the of applying some soil amendments (sulphur (S) (0.5 Mg fed-1), gypsum (G) (2 Mg fed-1), compost (C) (5 Mg fed-1) and their combinations, (S+G), (G+C), (S+C) and (S + G and C), comparing with control) in salt affected soil on soil properties, forage yield and quality of fodder beet variety, A randomized complete block design with three replications was applied.Application of soil amendments weresignificantly edsoil EC values in case of the first and second growing seasons. Whereas, the soil pH was significantly decreased by applying all amendments compared to control. The concentrations of N, P and K in fodder plants illustrate a relative increase by decreasing soil salinity as a result of was adding different amendments.The results showed that soil amendment application increased top and root fresh yield, dry matter yield, crude protein content, root length and diameter, while values of Nutrient Detergent Fiber (NDF) and Acid Detergent Fiber (ADF) Generally fodder beet top had higher contents of crude protein, crude fiber and ash than roots and the reverse was true for organic matter and nitrogen free extract contents. The percentage of Total Digestive Nutrients percentage (TDN), Relative Feeding Value (RFV) and Relative Forage Quality (RFQ) overall the studied treatments had a prime performance as a superior intake.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Soil amendments significantly reduced soil pH relative to control.
Verbatim
e0“the soil pH was significantly decreased by applying all amendments compared to control.”
t0“Fodder Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Amendment application increased N, P and K concentrations in fodder plants as soil salinity decreased.
- Taxon
- Fodder Beett0
- Treatment
- different amendmentse0
- Outcome
- concentrations of N, P and K in fodder plantse0
- Direction
- increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The concentrations of N, P and K in fodder plants illustrate a relative increase by decreasing soil salinity as a result of was adding different amendments.”
t0“Fodder Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil amendments increased fodder beet top and root fresh yield and dry matter yield.
- Taxon
- Fodder Beett0
- Treatment
- soil amendment applicatione0
- Outcome
- top and root fresh yield, dry matter yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“soil amendment application increased top and root fresh yield, dry matter yield, crude protein content, root length and diameter”
t0“Fodder Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil amendments increased crude protein content.
- Taxon
- Fodder Beett0
- Treatment
- soil amendment applicatione0
- Outcome
- crude protein contente0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“soil amendment application increased top and root fresh yield, dry matter yield, crude protein content, root length and diameter”
t0“Fodder Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil amendments increased root length and diameter.
- Taxon
- Fodder Beett0
- Treatment
- soil amendment applicatione0
- Outcome
- root length and diametere0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“soil amendment application increased top and root fresh yield, dry matter yield, crude protein content, root length and diameter”
t0“Fodder Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Fodder beet tops had higher crude protein, crude fiber and ash content than roots.
Verbatim
e0“fodder beet top had higher contents of crude protein, crude fiber and ash than roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Fodder beet roots had more organic matter and nitrogen free extract than tops.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“the reverse was true for organic matter and nitrogen free extract contents.”
t0“Fodder Beet”
The same questions in other papers
other · nutrient: content · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →other · quality: protein · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
other · soil: chemistry · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →other · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
23 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →other · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
27 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 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.