Abstract
The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors. The test results are derived from two different field experiments covering a total of seven years of observation. Protein yield was significantly dependent on changing weather conditions in the growing seasons. Protein yield was significantly lower in the dry and hot years. The sum of precipitation for the month of May was positively correlated with maize protein yield. However, there was no correlation between the average air temperature and the amount of protein yield. The sum of atmospheric precipitation for the entire growing season (IV–X) shaped maize protein yield in over 96%. A non-linear relationship of the 2nd degree was determined between these traits. Sowing maize into the soil cultivated traditionally (autumn tillage), “stay-green” type cultivars and row fertilization positively influenced maize protein yield. Initial fertilization (regardless of depth) with two-component NP fertilizer, in relation to broadcast fertilization, significantly increased maize protein yield from 11.4% to 18%, respectively. The type of nitrogen fertilizer did not differentiate the value of this trait. Pre-sowing nitrogen application was more effective compared to the top dressing, and significantly increased protein yield. Row fertilization with two-component NP fertilizer clearly affected the content protein in grain. The interdependence of genetic and agronomic progress is an important factor shaping the potential of maize protein yield and cannot be attributed to either breeding (cultivar) or agronomy.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Maize protein yield depended significantly on weather conditions in the growing seasons.
Zea maysNot reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e1“Protein yield was significantly dependent on changing weather conditions in the growing seasons”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize protein yield was significantly lower in dry and hot years.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e2“Protein yield was significantly lower in the dry and hot years”
Claim · model-written summary
Precipitation in May was positively correlated with maize protein yield.
- Treatment
- sum of precipitation for the month of Maye3
- Outcome
- maize protein yielde3
- Direction
- positively correlatede3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e3“The sum of precipitation for the month of May was positively correlated with maize protein yield”
Claim · model-written summary
There was no correlation between average air temperature and maize protein yield.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e4“there was no correlation between the average air temperature and the amount of protein yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Precipitation over the entire growing season shaped maize protein yield in over 96%.
- Treatment
- sum of atmospheric precipitation for the entire growing season (IV–X)e5
- Outcome
- maize protein yielde5
- Value
- over 96%e5
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e5“The sum of atmospheric precipitation for the entire growing season (IV–X) shaped maize protein yield in over 96%”
Claim · model-written summary
The relationship between growing-season precipitation and maize protein yield was non-linear, of the 2nd degree.
- Treatment
- sum of atmospheric precipitation for the entire growing season (IV–X)e5
- Outcome
- maize protein yielde5
- Qualifier
- non-linear relationship of the 2nd degreee6
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e5“The sum of atmospheric precipitation for the entire growing season (IV–X) shaped maize protein yield in over 96%”
e6“A non-linear relationship of the 2nd degree was determined between these traits”
Claim · model-written summary
Sowing into traditionally cultivated soil (autumn tillage) positively influenced maize protein yield.
- Treatment
- Sowing maize into the soil cultivated traditionally (autumn tillage)e7
- Outcome
- maize protein yielde7
- Direction
- positively influencede7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e7“Sowing maize into the soil cultivated traditionally (autumn tillage), “stay-green” type cultivars and row fertilization positively influenced maize protein yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Stay-green cultivars positively influenced maize protein yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e7“Sowing maize into the soil cultivated traditionally (autumn tillage), “stay-green” type cultivars and row fertilization positively influenced maize protein yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Row fertilization positively influenced maize protein yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e7“Sowing maize into the soil cultivated traditionally (autumn tillage), “stay-green” type cultivars and row fertilization positively influenced maize protein yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Initial two-component NP fertilization significantly increased maize protein yield from 11.4% to 18% relative to broadcast fertilization.
- Treatment
- Initial fertilization (regardless of depth) with two-component NP fertilizere1
- Outcome
- maize protein yielde1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Value
- from 11.4% to 18%e1
- Comparator
- broadcast fertilizatione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e1“Initial fertilization (regardless of depth) with two-component NP fertilizer, in relation to broadcast fertilization, significantly increased maize protein yield from 11.4% to 18%, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
The type of nitrogen fertilizer did not differentiate protein yield.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e1“The type of nitrogen fertilizer did not differentiate the value of this trait”
Claim · model-written summary
Pre-sowing nitrogen application was more effective than top dressing for maize protein yield.
- Treatment
- Pre-sowing nitrogen applicatione1
- Outcome
- more effectivee1
- Direction
- more effectivee1
- Comparator
- top dressinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e1“Pre-sowing nitrogen application was more effective compared to the top dressing, and significantly increased protein yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Pre-sowing nitrogen application significantly increased maize protein yield compared with top dressing.
- Treatment
- Pre-sowing nitrogen applicatione1
- Outcome
- protein yielde1
- Direction
- significantly increasede1
- Comparator
- top dressinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e1“Pre-sowing nitrogen application was more effective compared to the top dressing, and significantly increased protein yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Row fertilization with two-component NP fertilizer clearly affected grain protein content.
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e1“Row fertilization with two-component NP fertilizer clearly affected the content protein in grain”
Claim · model-written summary
Genetic and agronomic progress are interdependent in shaping maize protein yield potential and cannot be attributed to breeding or agronomy alone.
- Treatment
- interdependence of genetic and agronomic progresse1
- Outcome
- potential of maize protein yielde1
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The subject of the work was the evaluation of maize protein yield conditioned by various agrotechnical factors”
e1“The interdependence of genetic and agronomic progress is an important factor shaping the potential of maize protein yield and cannot be attributed to either breeding (cultivar) or agronomy”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
26 papers more in this group
See all 30 papers →nitrogen · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
163 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
177 papers more in this group
See all 181 papers →fertilization · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
235 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
258 papers more in this group
See all 262 papers →nanoparticle · quality: protein · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
12 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 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.