Abstract
Abstract Improving nitrogen use efficiency (NUE) has great significance for agriculture sustainable development and reducing environmental pollution. The effects of Mg fertilizer combined with straw return on yield, N uptake, and NUE of spring maize ( Zea mays L.) were investigated for two consecutive years. The treatments included JM3 (straw + magnesium fertilizer), JM0 (straw + no magnesium fertilizer), WM3 (no straw + magnesium fertilizer), and WM0 (no magnesium fertilizer + no straw). The application of Mg fertilizer significantly improved yield. The application of straw and Mg fertilizer together improved yield even more significantly; the grain yield of the JM3 treatment was 5.28% higher than that of the WM0 treatments. The highest total N uptake was obtained from the JM3. Nitrogen remobilization from vegetation organs to grain was highest in the JM3 treatment. The agronomic efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen (AEN), recovery of applied fertilizer nitrogen (REN), partial factor productivity of fertilizer nitrogen (PFPN), and nitrogen harvest index (NHI) responded significantly to straw return and Mg fertilizer. The AEN, REN, PFPN, and NHI values for the JM3 treatment were 15.35, 24.63, 5.28, and 2.31% higher on average, respectively, than those for the WM0 treatments. Generally, these outcomes indicated that there was an interaction between Mg fertilizer and maize straw. The application of Mg fertilizer with straw return significantly improved the grain yield, N uptake, and NUE of maize plants. The combination of straw return and Mg application is a practical method for increasing maize production and supporting sustainable agriculture.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Mg fertilizer application significantly improved maize yield.
Zea maysNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“The application of Mg fertilizer significantly improved yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Straw return combined with Mg fertilizer improved yield even more significantly.
- Treatment
- straw and Mg fertilizere2
- Outcome
- yielde2
- Direction
- improvede2
- Qualifier
- even more significantlye2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e2“The application of straw and Mg fertilizer together improved yield even more significantly”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain yield of the JM3 treatment was 5.28% higher than that of the WM0 treatments.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e3“the grain yield of the JM3 treatment was 5.28% higher than that of the WM0 treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Total N uptake was highest in the JM3 treatment.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e4“The highest total N uptake was obtained from the JM3”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen remobilization from vegetation organs to grain was highest in the JM3 treatment.
- Organ / stage
- vegetation organse5
- Treatment
- JM3 treatmente5
- Outcome
- Nitrogen remobilizatione5
- Direction
- higheste5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e5“Nitrogen remobilization from vegetation organs to grain was highest in the JM3 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Agronomic efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen (AEN) was 15.35% higher on average for JM3 than for WM0 treatments.
- Treatment
- JM3 treatmente6
- Outcome
- agronomic efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen (AEN)e7
- Direction
- highere6
- Value
- 15.35e6
- Qualifier
- on averagee6
- Comparator
- WM0 treatmentse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e6“The AEN, REN, PFPN, and NHI values for the JM3 treatment were 15.35, 24.63, 5.28, and 2.31% higher on average, respectively, than those for the WM0 treatments”
e7“The agronomic efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen (AEN), recovery of applied fertilizer nitrogen (REN), partial factor productivity of fertilizer nitrogen (PFPN), and nitrogen harvest index (NHI) responded significantly to straw return and Mg fertilizer”
Claim · model-written summary
Recovery of applied fertilizer nitrogen (REN) was 24.63 higher on average for JM3 than for WM0 treatments.
- Treatment
- JM3 treatmente6
- Outcome
- recovery of applied fertilizer nitrogen (REN)e7
- Direction
- highere6
- Value
- 24.63e6
- Qualifier
- on averagee6
- Comparator
- WM0 treatmentse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e6“The AEN, REN, PFPN, and NHI values for the JM3 treatment were 15.35, 24.63, 5.28, and 2.31% higher on average, respectively, than those for the WM0 treatments”
e7“The agronomic efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen (AEN), recovery of applied fertilizer nitrogen (REN), partial factor productivity of fertilizer nitrogen (PFPN), and nitrogen harvest index (NHI) responded significantly to straw return and Mg fertilizer”
Claim · model-written summary
Partial factor productivity of fertilizer nitrogen (PFPN) was 5.28 higher on average for JM3 than for WM0 treatments.
- Treatment
- JM3 treatmente6
- Outcome
- partial factor productivity of fertilizer nitrogen (PFPN)e7
- Direction
- highere6
- Value
- 5.28e6
- Qualifier
- on averagee6
- Comparator
- WM0 treatmentse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e6“The AEN, REN, PFPN, and NHI values for the JM3 treatment were 15.35, 24.63, 5.28, and 2.31% higher on average, respectively, than those for the WM0 treatments”
e7“The agronomic efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen (AEN), recovery of applied fertilizer nitrogen (REN), partial factor productivity of fertilizer nitrogen (PFPN), and nitrogen harvest index (NHI) responded significantly to straw return and Mg fertilizer”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen harvest index (NHI) was 2.31 higher on average for JM3 than for WM0 treatments.
- Treatment
- JM3 treatmente6
- Outcome
- nitrogen harvest index (NHI)e7
- Direction
- highere6
- Value
- 2.31e6
- Qualifier
- on averagee6
- Comparator
- WM0 treatmentse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e6“The AEN, REN, PFPN, and NHI values for the JM3 treatment were 15.35, 24.63, 5.28, and 2.31% higher on average, respectively, than those for the WM0 treatments”
e7“The agronomic efficiency of fertilizer nitrogen (AEN), recovery of applied fertilizer nitrogen (REN), partial factor productivity of fertilizer nitrogen (PFPN), and nitrogen harvest index (NHI) responded significantly to straw return and Mg fertilizer”
Claim · model-written summary
Mg fertilizer and maize straw interacted in their effects on the outcomes.
- Outcome
- interaction between Mg fertilizer and maize strawe1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spring maize ( Zea mays L.)”
e1“there was an interaction between Mg fertilizer and maize straw”
Claim · model-written summary
Combining straw return with Mg application is a practical method for increasing maize production.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The combination of straw return and Mg application is a practical method for increasing maize production and supporting sustainable agriculture”
The same questions in other papers
magnesium atom · yield · Zea mays (maize)Results differ
35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
43 papers more in this group
See all 47 papers →fertilization · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
3,484 papers in the same direction as this paper · 338 in the opposite direction · 85 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- negative
3,904 papers more in this group
See all 3,908 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.