Abstract
Abstract Sugarcane ( Saccharum spp) crop has high social, economic and environmental importance for several regions throughout the world. However, the increasing demand for efficiency and optimization of agricultural resources generates uncertainties regarding high mineral fertilizer consumption. Thereby, organomineral fertilizers are to reduce the conventional sources consumption. Thus, this study was carried out to evaluate the agronomic and economic sugarcane performancies and the residual effect of P and K under mineral and organomineral fertilization. Growth and technological parameters, leaf and soil nutrients concentration in surface and subsurface layers were analyzed from sugarcane planting (plant cane) until the first ratoon. Agronomic and economic sugarcane efficiency were evaluated. At the first ratoon, resin-extractable P provided by mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 15 and 11 mg kg −1 in the 0.0–0.2 m, and 28 and 31 mg kg −1 in 0.2–0.4 m layer. However, exchangeable K in the 0.0–0.2 m layer was 1.88 and 1.58 mmol c kg −1 for mineral and organomineral fertilizers, respectively. The yield gains over the control reached with mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 10.99 and 17 Mg ha −1 at the lowest fertilizer rate; and 29.25 and 61.3 Mg ha −1 at the highest fertilizer rate. Agronomic and economic organomineral fertilizer efficiencies are more pronounced in plant cane. Summing two harvests, the organomineral is 7% more profitable than mineral fertilizer.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Mineral fertilizer raised sugarcane yield over the control by 10.99 Mg ha−1 at the lowest fertilizer rate.
Verbatim
e1“The yield gains over the control reached with mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 10.99 and 17 Mg ha −1 at the lowest fertilizer rate; and 29.25 and 61.3 Mg ha −1 at the highest fertilizer rate”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Organomineral fertilizer raised sugarcane yield over the control by 17 Mg ha−1 at the lowest fertilizer rate.
Verbatim
e1“The yield gains over the control reached with mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 10.99 and 17 Mg ha −1 at the lowest fertilizer rate; and 29.25 and 61.3 Mg ha −1 at the highest fertilizer rate”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Mineral fertilizer raised sugarcane yield over the control by 29.25 Mg ha−1 at the highest fertilizer rate.
Verbatim
e1“The yield gains over the control reached with mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 10.99 and 17 Mg ha −1 at the lowest fertilizer rate; and 29.25 and 61.3 Mg ha −1 at the highest fertilizer rate”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Organomineral fertilizer raised sugarcane yield over the control by 61.3 Mg ha−1 at the highest fertilizer rate.
Verbatim
e1“The yield gains over the control reached with mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 10.99 and 17 Mg ha −1 at the lowest fertilizer rate; and 29.25 and 61.3 Mg ha −1 at the highest fertilizer rate”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Agronomic and economic organomineral fertilizer efficiencies are more pronounced in plant cane.
Verbatim
e2“Agronomic and economic organomineral fertilizer efficiencies are more pronounced in plant cane”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Summing two harvests, the organomineral fertilizer is 7% more profitable than mineral fertilizer.
Verbatim
e3“Summing two harvests, the organomineral is 7% more profitable than mineral fertilizer”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
At the first ratoon, resin-extractable P under mineral fertilizer was 15 mg kg−1 in the 0.0–0.2 m layer.
Verbatim
e4“resin-extractable P provided by mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 15 and 11 mg kg −1 in the 0.0–0.2 m, and 28 and 31 mg kg −1 in 0.2–0.4 m layer”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
At the first ratoon, resin-extractable P under organomineral fertilizer was 11 mg kg−1 in the 0.0–0.2 m layer.
Verbatim
e4“resin-extractable P provided by mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 15 and 11 mg kg −1 in the 0.0–0.2 m, and 28 and 31 mg kg −1 in 0.2–0.4 m layer”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
At the first ratoon, resin-extractable P under mineral fertilizer was 28 mg kg−1 in the 0.2–0.4 m layer.
Verbatim
e4“resin-extractable P provided by mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 15 and 11 mg kg −1 in the 0.0–0.2 m, and 28 and 31 mg kg −1 in 0.2–0.4 m layer”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
At the first ratoon, resin-extractable P under organomineral fertilizer was 31 mg kg−1 in the 0.2–0.4 m layer.
Verbatim
e4“resin-extractable P provided by mineral and organomineral fertilizers were, respectively, 15 and 11 mg kg −1 in the 0.0–0.2 m, and 28 and 31 mg kg −1 in 0.2–0.4 m layer”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Under mineral fertilizer, exchangeable K in the 0.0–0.2 m layer was 1.88 mmol c kg−1 at the first ratoon.
Verbatim
e5“exchangeable K in the 0.0–0.2 m layer was 1.88 and 1.58 mmol c kg −1 for mineral and organomineral fertilizers, respectively”
t0“Sugarcane”
Claim · model-written summary
Under organomineral fertilizer, exchangeable K in the 0.0–0.2 m layer was 1.58 mmol c kg−1 at the first ratoon.
Verbatim
e5“exchangeable K in the 0.0–0.2 m layer was 1.88 and 1.58 mmol c kg −1 for mineral and organomineral fertilizers, respectively”
t0“Sugarcane”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · yield · Saccharum officinarum (sugarcane)Positive and negative results
311 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
342 papers more in this group
See all 346 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.