Abstract
Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic) , planted polyethylene plastic in the lath house were fertilized at three levels with humic acid (0 , 1 and 2 ml.L-1) liquid fertilizer (1-0-1) Essential plus (0 , 1 and 2 ml.L-1)and GA3 (0, 25 and 50 mg.L-1) to improve vegetative growth of the seedlings. The experiment was factorial design in (C.R.D) with 3 replicates and 4 seedlings within replicate, Dancant test was used to compare the treatments mean, at the level 5% probability. The important results were as follows: humic acid treatment improved shoots number , leaves number , leaves content of total chlorophyll, leaves dry weight , leaf area , significantly as compared with the control treatment. White Adriatic seedlings was superior on Aswad Dyalla , significantly in seedling height , shoot number , fresh and dry weight of the leaves , and leaf area. Spray with GA3 (25 and 50 mg.L-1) increased stem height and diameter significantly Interaction between 2 ml.L-1 of humic acid and White Adriatic was the superior in the most parameters.
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
Humic acid treatment increased shoot number, leaf number and total chlorophyll content of fig seedlings compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“humic acid treatment improved shoots number , leaves number , leaves content of total chlorophyll, leaves dry weight , leaf area , significantly as compared with the control treatment”
e1“Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic)”
e2“planted polyethylene plastic in the lath house”
Claim · model-written summary
Humic acid treatment increased leaf dry weight and leaf area of fig seedlings compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“humic acid treatment improved shoots number , leaves number , leaves content of total chlorophyll, leaves dry weight , leaf area , significantly as compared with the control treatment”
e1“Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic)”
e2“planted polyethylene plastic in the lath house”
Claim · model-written summary
White Adriatic seedlings were superior to Aswad Dyalla in seedling height and shoot number.
Verbatim
e1“Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic)”
e3“White Adriatic seedlings was superior on Aswad Dyalla , significantly in seedling height , shoot number , fresh and dry weight of the leaves , and leaf area”
Claim · model-written summary
White Adriatic seedlings were superior to Aswad Dyalla in fresh and dry weight of the leaves.
Verbatim
e1“Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic)”
e3“White Adriatic seedlings was superior on Aswad Dyalla , significantly in seedling height , shoot number , fresh and dry weight of the leaves , and leaf area”
Claim · model-written summary
White Adriatic seedlings were superior to Aswad Dyalla in leaf area.
Verbatim
e1“Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic)”
e3“White Adriatic seedlings was superior on Aswad Dyalla , significantly in seedling height , shoot number , fresh and dry weight of the leaves , and leaf area”
Claim · model-written summary
GA3 spray at 25 and 50 mg/L increased stem height and diameter of fig seedlings.
- Taxon
- fige1
- Treatment
- Spray with GA3 (25 and 50 mg.L-1)e4
- Outcome
- stem height and diametere4
- Direction
- increasede4
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e1“Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic)”
e4“Spray with GA3 (25 and 50 mg.L-1) increased stem height and diameter significantly”
Claim · model-written summary
The interaction of 2 ml/L humic acid with White Adriatic was superior in most parameters.
Verbatim
e1“Seedlings of two fig cvs. (Aswad Dyalla and White Adriatic)”
e5“Interaction between 2 ml.L-1 of humic acid and White Adriatic was the superior in the most parameters”
The same questions in other papers
Gibberellic acid · growth · Ficus carica (common fig)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →application · growth · Ficus carica (common fig)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →other · growth · Ficus carica (common fig)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
other · physiology: pigments · Ficus carica (common fig)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
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.