Paper · 2020 · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)

Combined application of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizers to improve the yield and grain quality of wheat.

Manman Yuan; Wu Gang; Geng Wei; et al.

12
claims
16
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

To investigate the effects of combined application formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizers on yield and grain quality of wheat, two field experiments were performed in the Xi'erpu and Huting villages, the main growing areas of winter wheat in the Anhui Province. The experiments included usual farmer's practices, application of different formula fertilizers, and application of combined formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizers. The results showed that compared with the farmer's usual practices, the use of formula fertilizers significantly increased wheat yield, and the combined application of zinc and sulfur fertilizers provided the highest yield. Therefore, the economic benefit of wheat was the highest under the treatment with combined formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizers. Similarly, compared with the farmer's usual practices, applying this combination of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizer increased the partial productivity of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in wheat on average by 35.0%, 107.0%, and 99.1%, respectively. Meanwhile, the content of zinc and the accumulation of zinc and sulfur in the wheat grain increased upon use of zinc, sulfur, and formula fertilizers. However, they had no obvious effect on sulfur content, protein and its components content, and starch and its components content in the grains. However, the glutenin to gliadin ratio had a general increasing trend, and amylase to amylopectin ratio had a general decreasing trend under the treatment of combined zinc, sulfur, and formula fertilizers compared with farmer's usual practices. The results suggested that the wheat quality increased with the application of zinc and sulfur fertilizers. Therefore, in areas with low soil zinc and sulfur content, the combined application of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizers could improve the wheat grain yield and quality.

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Formula fertilizer significantly increased wheat yield versus farmer practice.

Treatment
formula fertilizerse0
Outcome
wheat yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
farmer's usual practicese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“compared with the farmer's usual practices, the use of formula fertilizers significantly increased wheat yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 449–559 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined zinc and sulfur fertilizers gave the highest yield.

Treatment
combined application of zinc and sulfur fertilizerse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the combined application of zinc and sulfur fertilizers provided the highest yield.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 565–648 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 104–109 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Economic benefit was highest with combined formula, zinc and sulfur fertilizer.

Treatment
combined formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizerse0
Outcome
economic benefite0
Direction
higheste0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the economic benefit of wheat was the highest under the treatment with combined formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 660–778 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined fertilizer increased partial nitrogen productivity by 35.0%.

Treatment
this combination of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizere0
Outcome
partial productivity of nitrogene0
Direction
increasede0
Value
35.0%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“applying this combination of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizer increased the partial productivity of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in wheat on average by 35.0%, 107.0%, and 99.1%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 834–1036 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined fertilizer increased partial phosphorus productivity by 107.0%.

Treatment
this combination of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizere0
Outcome
partial productivity of nitrogen, phosphoruse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
107.0%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“applying this combination of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizer increased the partial productivity of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in wheat on average by 35.0%, 107.0%, and 99.1%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 834–1036 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined fertilizer increased partial potassium productivity by 99.1%.

Treatment
this combination of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizere0
Outcome
partial productivity of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassiume0
Direction
increasede0
Value
99.1%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“applying this combination of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizer increased the partial productivity of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium in wheat on average by 35.0%, 107.0%, and 99.1%, respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 834–1036 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizers increased grain zinc content and zinc and sulfur accumulation.

Organ / stage
graine0
Treatment
zinc, sulfur, and formula fertilizerse0
Outcome
content of zinc and the accumulation of zinc and sulfur in the wheat graine0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the content of zinc and the accumulation of zinc and sulfur in the wheat grain increased upon use of zinc, sulfur, and formula fertilizers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1048–1187 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilizers had no obvious effect on grain sulfur, protein or starch content.

Organ / stage
grainse0
Outcome
sulfur content, protein and its components content, and starch and its components content in the grainse0
Direction
no obvious effecte0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“they had no obvious effect on sulfur content, protein and its components content, and starch and its components content in the grains.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1197–1331 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 104–109 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The glutenin to gliadin ratio generally increased under combined fertilizer.

Outcome
glutenin to gliadin ratioe0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the glutenin to gliadin ratio had a general increasing trend”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1341–1401 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 104–109 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The amylase to amylopectin ratio generally decreased under combined fertilizer versus farmer practice.

Treatment
combined zinc, sulfur, and formula fertilizerse0
Outcome
amylase to amylopectin ratioe0
Direction
decreasinge0
Comparator
farmer's usual practicese0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“amylase to amylopectin ratio had a general decreasing trend under the treatment of combined zinc, sulfur, and formula fertilizers compared with farmer's usual practices.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1407–1576 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 104–109 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors concluded that zinc and sulfur fertilizers improved wheat quality.

Treatment
zinc and sulfur fertilizerse0
Outcome
wheat qualitye0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the wheat quality increased with the application of zinc and sulfur fertilizers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1604–1684 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend combined fertilizer where soil zinc and sulfur are low to improve yield and quality.

Outcome
combined application of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizerse0
Qualifier
areas with low soil zinc and sulfur contente0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in areas with low soil zinc and sulfur content, the combined application of formula, zinc, and sulfur fertilizers could improve the wheat grain yield and quality.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1696–1858 · show in text ↑

sulfur atom · quality: general · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

14 papers: 8 positive, 6 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

zinc atom · quality: general · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

19 papers: 15 positive, 4 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

zinc atom · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

111 papers: 85 positive, 26 negative or no effect

84 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. negative

107 papers more in this group

See all 111 papers →

sulfur atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

148 papers: 124 positive, 24 negative or no effect

123 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

144 papers more in this group

See all 148 papers →

zinc atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

511 papers: 456 positive, 55 negative or no effect

455 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

507 papers more in this group

See all 511 papers →

sulfur atom · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

39 papers: 36 positive, 3 negative or no effect

35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

35 papers more in this group

See all 39 papers →

fertilization · quality: general · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

173 papers: 146 positive, 27 negative or no effect

145 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

169 papers more in this group

See all 173 papers →

fertilization · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

288 papers: 232 positive, 56 negative or no effect

231 papers in the same direction as this paper · 54 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

284 papers more in this group

See all 288 papers →

8 of 9 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.