Abstract
Abstract This study was carried out during spring and fall growing seasons of 2013 in Alfayadah district –Alhindiya Kerbala governorate to study the effect of different concentration of SA, two periods of irrigation as well as their interaction on the yield and its componants of maize plants. Maize cultivars were Almaha, Buhooth, Fajer, Baghdad and Local. Factorial experiment within randomized complete block design ( R.C.B.D) was adopted (5∗2∗5) for SA, irrigation period and cultivars respectively with three replicates. Means were compared using LSD at 0.05 probability level. The 1st addition of SA was at 4-5 true leaves stage and the 2nd addition was one month after the 1st one (50%of male flowering ), Results revealed that SA resulted in a significant increase in dry weight of yield (g) at the concentrations of 200 and 150 mg/L SA 68.00% & 32.10% for both seasons respectively. Higher weight of 100 seeds 5.72% was found at 150 mg / L SA during the fall season. The biological yield was also increased by 10.63% & 15.83% at a concentration of 200 mg/L SA for both seasons respectively. Increasing the intervals of irrigation from 7 to 14 days caused a reduction in dry weight of yield by 21.27% and 15.37% and weight of 100 seeds by 9.62% & 5.84% respectively, as well as reducing the biological yield by 10.55 & %17.32% for both seasons respectively. Maize cultivars showed fluctuations in most studied parameters between spring and fall seasons. The interaction between SA & water interval showed a significant increase of most studied parameters concerning, yield and its components.The interaction between SA and cultivars significantily affected the above mentioned parameters.The interaction between the three factors had a significant effect on the studied traits.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
At 200 mg/L salicylic acid, dry yield weight increased 68.00% in one season.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SA resulted in a significant increase in dry weight of yield (g) at the concentrations of 200 and 150 mg/L SA 68.00% & 32.10% for both seasons respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
At 150 mg/L salicylic acid, dry yield weight increased 32.10% in the other season.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“SA resulted in a significant increase in dry weight of yield (g) at the concentrations of 200 and 150 mg/L SA 68.00% & 32.10% for both seasons respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
At 150 mg/L salicylic acid, 100-seed weight was 5.72% higher in fall.
- Treatment
- 150 mg / L SAe0
- Outcome
- weight of 100 seedse0
- Direction
- Highere0
- Value
- 5.72%e0
- Qualifier
- fall seasone0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher weight of 100 seeds 5.72% was found at 150 mg / L SA during the fall season.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
At 200 mg/L salicylic acid, biological yield increased 10.63% in one season.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The biological yield was also increased by 10.63% & 15.83% at a concentration of 200 mg/L SA for both seasons respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
At 200 mg/L salicylic acid, biological yield increased 15.83% in the other season.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The biological yield was also increased by 10.63% & 15.83% at a concentration of 200 mg/L SA for both seasons respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Extending irrigation from 7 to 14 days reduced dry yield weight 21.27% in one season.
- Treatment
- 14 dayse0
- Outcome
- dry weight of yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 21.27%e0
- Qualifier
- intervals of irrigatione0
- Comparator
- 7e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing the intervals of irrigation from 7 to 14 days caused a reduction in dry weight of yield by 21.27% and 15.37%”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Extending irrigation from 7 to 14 days reduced dry yield weight 15.37% in the other season.
- Treatment
- 14 dayse0
- Outcome
- dry weight of yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 15.37%e0
- Qualifier
- intervals of irrigatione0
- Comparator
- 7e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Increasing the intervals of irrigation from 7 to 14 days caused a reduction in dry weight of yield by 21.27% and 15.37%”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Longer irrigation interval reduced 100-seed weight by 9.62% in one season.
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weight of 100 seeds by 9.62% & 5.84% respectively”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Longer irrigation interval reduced 100-seed weight by 5.84% in the other season.
Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weight of 100 seeds by 9.62% & 5.84% respectively”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Longer irrigation interval reduced biological yield by 10.55 in one season.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reducing the biological yield by 10.55 & %17.32% for both seasons respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Longer irrigation interval reduced biological yield by %17.32% in the other season.
Not reportedTreatmentComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“reducing the biological yield by 10.55 & %17.32% for both seasons respectively.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize cultivars varied across most studied traits between seasons.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Maize cultivars showed fluctuations in most studied parameters between spring and fall seasons.”
Claim · model-written summary
Salicylic acid and irrigation interval interacted significantly for yield and its components.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The interaction between SA & water interval showed a significant increase of most studied parameters concerning, yield and its components.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
Salicylic acid and cultivar interacted significantly for yield parameters.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The interaction between SA and cultivars significantily affected the above mentioned parameters.”
t0“maize”
Claim · model-written summary
The three factors interacted significantly for studied traits.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The interaction between the three factors had a significant effect on the studied traits.”
t0“maize”
The same questions in other papers
salicylic acid · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 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.