Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dry biomass production and the physiological quality of millet (Pennisetum glaucum) based on the application of zinc (Zn) on the soil. The study was conducted in a completely randomized design consisting of five Zn doses: 0; 3; 6; 9 and 12 kg ha-1, with four replications. The following biometrics such as physiological quality, biomass production and nutritional efficiency as for the use of Zn by plants were evaluated. The results showed that doses around 9 kg ha-1 are the ones promoting the highest observed rates. However, higher Zn supply in the soil negatively affected the physiological quality of the crop, as for the evaluated variables, except for the photochemical efficiency of photosystem II. However, Pennisetum glaucum is responsive to the production of dry biomass up to the Zn dose of 9 kg ha-1, without reducing the efficiency of the nutrient utilization by the crop.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Zinc doses around 9 kg ha-1 promoted the highest observed rates.
- Taxon
- Pennisetum glaucum
Cenchrus americanust0 - Treatment
- doses around 9 kg ha-1e0
- Outcome
- highest observed ratese0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“doses around 9 kg ha-1 are the ones promoting the highest observed rates”
t0“Pennisetum glaucum”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher soil zinc supply negatively affected the physiological quality of millet.
- Taxon
- Pennisetum glaucumCenchrus americanust0
- Treatment
- higher Zn supply in the soile0
- Outcome
- physiological qualitye0
- Direction
- negatively affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher Zn supply in the soil negatively affected the physiological quality of the crop”
t0“Pennisetum glaucum”
Claim · model-written summary
Photochemical efficiency of photosystem II was excepted from the negative effect of higher zinc supply.
- Taxon
- Pennisetum glaucumCenchrus americanust0
- Outcome
- photochemical efficiency of photosystem IIe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“except for the photochemical efficiency of photosystem II”
t0“Pennisetum glaucum”
Claim · model-written summary
Dry biomass production responded to zinc application up to 9 kg ha-1.
- Taxon
- Pennisetum glaucumCenchrus americanuse0
- Treatment
- Zn dose of 9 kg ha-1e0
- Outcome
- production of dry biomasse0
- Direction
- responsivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pennisetum glaucum is responsive to the production of dry biomass up to the Zn dose of 9 kg ha-1”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient utilization efficiency was not reduced under the tested zinc response.
- Taxon
- Pennisetum glaucumCenchrus americanust0
- Outcome
- efficiency of the nutrient utilizatione0
- Direction
- without reducinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“without reducing the efficiency of the nutrient utilization by the crop”
t0“Pennisetum glaucum”
The same questions in other papers
zinc atom · yield · Cenchrus americanus (pearl millet)Results differ
51 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
49 papers more in this group
See all 53 papers →zinc atom · quality: general · Cenchrus americanus (pearl millet)Positive and negative results
3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- 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.