Abstract
Human zinc malnutrition is a concern in the contemporary scenario. Ranked among the serious micronutrient deficiencies and considered a major cause of child mortality, especially in developing countries. Cereals, such as maize (Zea mays L.), food source in these countries, show low zinc concentration. In view of this, biofortification has been shown promise to increase the nutrient content in staple foods and to improve their nutritional quality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the potential of maize genotypes in relation to yield and zinc concentration in grains and leaves as a function of zinc sulfate doses in two growing seasons. A total of 17 commercial hybrids were evaluated in three doses (0, 5, and 10g L-1 ha-1). The zinc concentration was quantified by acid digestion, followed by atomic absorption spectrophotometer analysis. Any change was observed in grain yield as a function of the doses. Higher doses applied near flowering resulted in higher concentrations of the micronutrient in the grains. However, the concentrations in the grains were, on average, below the value established by the Harvest Plus biofortification program. The results provide information for the selection of genotypes with zinc uptake potential aiming at food safety through agronomic biofortification.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Zinc sulfate doses produced no change in grain yield.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“FOLIAR FEEDING WITH ZINC AS A BIOFORTIFICATION STRATEGY IN MAIZE”
e0“as a function of zinc sulfate doses in two growing seasons”
e1“Any change was observed in grain yield as a function of the doses”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher zinc doses applied near flowering increased grain zinc concentration.
- Organ / stage
- grainse2
- Treatment
- Higher doses applied near floweringe2
- Outcome
- concentrations of the micronutrient in the grainse2
- Direction
- highere2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“FOLIAR FEEDING WITH ZINC AS A BIOFORTIFICATION STRATEGY IN MAIZE”
e2“Higher doses applied near flowering resulted in higher concentrations of the micronutrient in the grains”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain zinc concentrations were on average below the HarvestPlus biofortification value.
- Outcome
- concentrations in the grainse3
- Direction
- belowe3
- Comparator
- the value established by the Harvest Plus biofortification programe3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“FOLIAR FEEDING WITH ZINC AS A BIOFORTIFICATION STRATEGY IN MAIZE”
e3“However, the concentrations in the grains were, on average, below the value established by the Harvest Plus biofortification program”
Claim · model-written summary
The results support selecting maize genotypes with zinc uptake potential for agronomic biofortification.
- Outcome
- selection of genotypes with zinc uptake potentiale4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“FOLIAR FEEDING WITH ZINC AS A BIOFORTIFICATION STRATEGY IN MAIZE”
e4“The results provide information for the selection of genotypes with zinc uptake potential aiming at food safety through agronomic biofortification”
The same questions in other papers
zinc sulfate · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 124 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
124 papers more in this group
See all 128 papers →stage · molecular: metabolites · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- 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.