Abstract
Foliar fertilization is a potential strategy to supplement phosphorus (P) requirements when conditions permit. In 2016 and 2017, canola, wheat, and pea were grown in a randomized complete block design trial near Pilger, SK, Canada. Each crop received a total P application of 20 kg P 2 O 5 ha −1 , with varying proportions of the P applied as seed-placed monoammonium phosphate (MAP) supplemented with foliar KH 2 PO 4 (0%, 25%, 50%, and 100%) applied prior to anthesis. Under field conditions, yield response decreased as the proportion applied as seed-placed MAP decreased. The 100% foliar-applied P treatment in canola was able to maintain significantly higher yield than the unfertilized control in the absence of seed-placed MAP, indicating some uptake and response. Of the crops evaluated, canola was most responsive to P fertilization. Phytate content ranged from 68% to over 90% of total seed P, with the highest proportions found in wheat grain. Foliar P application had limited effect on phytate and grain iron content, but there appeared to be an inverse relationship between seed-placed MAP and grain zinc concentration that was less evident when P was applied in foliar form. In this study, foliar P application was unable to substitute for seed-placed MAP and overall had a marginal effect on grain yield and P uptake as well as seed nutritional value.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Yield response fell as the seed-placed MAP share fell.
- Taxon
- canola
.jpg?width=60)
Brassica napus var. napust0 - Treatment
- seed-placed MAPe0
- Outcome
- yield responsee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Setting
- field conditionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Under field conditions, yield response decreased as the proportion applied as seed-placed MAP decreased.”
t0“canola, wheat, and pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Fully foliar P maintained higher canola yield than no fertilizer.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- 100% foliar-applied P treatmente0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- in the absence of seed-placed MAPe0
- Comparator
- unfertilized controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 100% foliar-applied P treatment in canola was able to maintain significantly higher yield than the unfertilized control in the absence of seed-placed MAP”
Claim · model-written summary
Canola responded most to P fertilization among the crops.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Outcome
- most responsive to P fertilizatione0
- Direction
- most responsivee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Of the crops evaluated, canola was most responsive to P fertilization.”
Claim · model-written summary
Phytate comprised 68% to over 90% of seed P.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivume0 - Organ / stage
- seede0
- Outcome
- Phytate contente0
- Value
- 68% to over 90%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Phytate content ranged from 68% to over 90% of total seed P, with the highest proportions found in wheat grain.”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat grain had the highest phytate proportion.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Organ / stage
- graine0
- Outcome
- proportionse0
- Direction
- higheste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with the highest proportions found in wheat grain”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar P had limited effect on phytate and grain iron content.
- Taxon
- canola, wheat, and pea
Lathyrus oleraceusTriticum aestivumBrassica napus var. napust0 - Treatment
- Foliar P applicatione0
- Outcome
- phytate and grain iron contente0
- Direction
- limited effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar P application had limited effect on phytate and grain iron content”
t0“canola, wheat, and pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Seed-placed MAP was inversely related to grain zinc concentration; the relationship was less evident with foliar P.
- Taxon
- canola, wheat, and peaLathyrus oleraceusTriticum aestivumBrassica napus var. napust0
- Treatment
- seed-placed MAPe0
- Outcome
- grain zinc concentratione0
- Direction
- inverse relationshipe0
- Qualifier
- less evident when P was applied in foliar forme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there appeared to be an inverse relationship between seed-placed MAP and grain zinc concentration that was less evident when P was applied in foliar form”
t0“canola, wheat, and pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar P could not substitute for seed-placed MAP.
- Taxon
- canola, wheat, and peaLathyrus oleraceusTriticum aestivumBrassica napus var. napust0
- Treatment
- foliar P applicatione0
- Outcome
- unable to substitute for seed-placed MAPe0
- Comparator
- seed-placed MAPe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“foliar P application was unable to substitute for seed-placed MAP”
t0“canola, wheat, and pea”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar P had marginal effect on grain yield, P uptake, and seed nutritional value.
- Taxon
- canola, wheat, and peaLathyrus oleraceusTriticum aestivumBrassica napus var. napust0
- Treatment
- foliar P applicatione1
- Outcome
- grain yield and P uptake as well as seed nutritional valuee0
- Direction
- marginal effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“overall had a marginal effect on grain yield and P uptake as well as seed nutritional value”
e1“foliar P application was unable to substitute for seed-placed MAP”
t0“canola, wheat, and pea”
The same questions in other papers
phosphorus · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results differ
68 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
72 papers more in this group
See all 76 papers →phosphorus · quality: general · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
phosphorus · quality: general · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
application · quality: general · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
application · quality: general · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
phosphorus · nutrient: content · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →application · nutrient: content · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →application · nutrient: content · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →8 of 14 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.