Paper · 2020 · ÇOMÜ Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi

Comparisons Nitrogen Use Efficiency in Chickpea under Different Tillage Systems and Soil Residual Nitrogen

Nihal KAYAN; İmren KUTLU; Nazife AYTER; et al.

5
claims
11
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

This research was conducted with two years (2012/2013-2014/2015) period at research field of Faculty of Agriculture, Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Eskisehir, Turkey. Main plots were composed to conventional (CT) and reduced tillage (RT). Wheat-wheat (WW); wheat-fallow (WF); wheat-chickpea (WC) crop rotations were placed in sub plots, and four nitrogen doses (0, 50, 100, 150 kg ha-1) were evaluated as sub-sub plots. All of the traits except for grain yield were significantly affected by years. The reason for differences between years may be ecological conditions, cultural practices and soil conditions. Plant protein ratio, plant N ratio and nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUtE) were higher RT than CT but nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUpE) were higher CT than RT. Increasing nitrogen doses were not affected the plant protein ratio and plant N ratio as expected. The reason of this, the nitrogen doses were applied to the pre-plant instead of chickpea and the nitrogen might be lost by washing in the long period. NUE and NUpE decreased by increasing nitrogen doses but NUtE increased.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chickpea plant protein ratio, plant nitrogen ratio and nitrogen utilization efficiency were higher with reduced than conventional tillage.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
RTe0
Outcome
Plant protein ratio, plant N ratio and nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUtE)e0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
CTe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plant protein ratio, plant N ratio and nitrogen utilization efficiency (NUtE) were higher RT than CT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 611–711 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–47 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen use efficiency and nitrogen uptake efficiency were higher with conventional than reduced tillage.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
CTe0
Outcome
nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUpE)e0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
RTe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) and nitrogen uptake efficiency (NUpE) were higher CT than RT”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 716–806 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–47 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing nitrogen doses did not affect chickpea plant protein or nitrogen ratios.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
Increasing nitrogen dosese0
Outcome
plant protein ratio and plant N ratioe0
Direction
not affectede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Increasing nitrogen doses were not affected the plant protein ratio and plant N ratio as expected.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 808–906 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–47 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen use and uptake efficiency decreased as nitrogen dose increased.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
increasing nitrogen dosese0
Outcome
NUE and NUpEe0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NUE and NUpE decreased by increasing nitrogen doses”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1058–1109 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–47 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen utilization efficiency increased with increasing nitrogen dose.

Taxon
ChickpeaCicer arietinumt0
Treatment
increasing nitrogen dosese1
Outcome
NUtEe0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Cicer arietinum
Cicer arietinum · TaxonSanjay Acharya · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“NUtE increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1114–1128 · show in text ↑
e1

“increasing nitrogen doses”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1084–1109 · show in text ↑
t0

“Chickpea”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 39–47 · show in text ↑

nitrogen · nutrient: efficiency · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

nitrogen · quality: protein · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 17 positive, 1 negative or no effect

17 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

tillage · nutrient: efficiency · Cicer arietinum (chickpea)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 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.