Paper · 2021 · African Journal of Food Agriculture Nutrition and Development

Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology

Mahmoud Hozayn; SM Azza; Cairo Univ., Giza, Egypt; et al.

17
claims
34
verbatim quotes
2
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Salinity stresses either in irrigation water and/or soil is one of the most serious agricultural problems facing farmers in arid and semi-arid regions included Egypt. Many are as in the Sinai region depend mainly on the underground water of various degrees of salinity that prevent cultivated crops from reach to the full yield.Under these conditions,a split-plot field experiment using three canola cultivars; Pactol, Serw-4 and Serw-6under three irrigation water treatments:i) Brackish-water (BW), ii) Magnetic-BW1; brackish water after magnetization through passing a three inch static-magnetic unit,3.75 mT,produced by Delta Water Company, Egypt and iii) Magnetic-BW2;brackish water after magnetization through passing a three inch static magnetic unit, 0.75 mT,produced by Magnetic-Technologies Company, UAE,was carried out at Agricultural Experimental Station of Desert Research Centre, Ras Sidr region, South Sinai Governorate, Egypt during the 2017/18 winter season. The results showed that irrigation with M-BW1or M-BW2surpassed irrigation with BW in all tested growth parameters (plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area, dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant,and total chlorophyll); leaf anatomy(instance, mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness); stem anatomy(stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter)and chemical analysis for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ) at 85 days after sowing (DAS). As an average of both magnetically brackish-water treatments over tested three canola varieties, the percent of improvement compared to irrigation with brackish-water ranged between 10.78-16.02% for growth parameters, 28.33-31.76% for dry matter of plant; 15.58 -80.81% for leaf;10.71-63.88% for stems and2.42-54.48% for mineral content of leaves at 85 DAS.Reverse trends were observed in the best indicators for alleviation salinity stress (Na, and proline),where these decrease dunder both magnetic brackish water treatments by 66.08 and 43.75%, respectively (average of both magnetically brackish-water treatments compared to BW water treatment). Generally, the three tested canola varieties showed a positive response under magnetic brackish water treatments. The positive results in above-mentioned parameters of vegetative growth reflected improvement in canola yield and its components. The percent of improvement ranged between 9.35and35.98 for yield components and reached1.29,19.66 and21.30% in seed oil percentage, seeds and oil yield (kg fed-1;fed=4200m2), respectively compared to brackish water.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 17

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Magnetized brackish water surpassed brackish water for plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area.

Organ / stage
85 days after sowing (DAS)e0
Treatment
M-BW1or M-BW2e0
Outcome
plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf areae0
Direction
surpassede0
Comparator
BWe0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with M-BW1or M-BW2surpassed irrigation with BW in all tested growth parameters (plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area, dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant,and total chlorophyll); leaf anatomy(instance, mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness); stem anatomy(stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter)and chemical analysis for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ) at 85 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 999–1544 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Magnetized brackish water surpassed brackish water for dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant.

Organ / stage
85 days after sowing (DAS)e0
Treatment
M-BW1or M-BW2e0
Outcome
dry matter of leaves, stem and total plante0
Direction
surpassede0
Comparator
BWe0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with M-BW1or M-BW2surpassed irrigation with BW in all tested growth parameters (plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area, dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant,and total chlorophyll); leaf anatomy(instance, mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness); stem anatomy(stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter)and chemical analysis for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ) at 85 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 999–1544 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Magnetized brackish water surpassed brackish water for total chlorophyll.

Organ / stage
85 days after sowing (DAS)e0
Treatment
M-BW1or M-BW2e0
Outcome
total chlorophylle0
Direction
surpassede0
Comparator
BWe0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with M-BW1or M-BW2surpassed irrigation with BW in all tested growth parameters (plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area, dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant,and total chlorophyll); leaf anatomy(instance, mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness); stem anatomy(stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter)and chemical analysis for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ) at 85 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 999–1544 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Magnetized brackish water surpassed brackish water for mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness.

Organ / stage
85 days after sowing (DAS)e0
Treatment
M-BW1or M-BW2e0
Outcome
mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thicknesse0
Direction
surpassede0
Comparator
BWe0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with M-BW1or M-BW2surpassed irrigation with BW in all tested growth parameters (plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area, dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant,and total chlorophyll); leaf anatomy(instance, mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness); stem anatomy(stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter)and chemical analysis for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ) at 85 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 999–1544 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Magnetized brackish water surpassed brackish water for stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter.

Organ / stage
85 days after sowing (DAS)e0
Treatment
M-BW1or M-BW2e0
Outcome
stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diametere0
Direction
surpassede0
Comparator
BWe0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with M-BW1or M-BW2surpassed irrigation with BW in all tested growth parameters (plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area, dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant,and total chlorophyll); leaf anatomy(instance, mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness); stem anatomy(stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter)and chemical analysis for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ) at 85 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 999–1544 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Magnetized brackish water surpassed brackish water for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ).

Organ / stage
85 days after sowing (DAS)e0
Treatment
M-BW1or M-BW2e0
Outcome
mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn )e0
Direction
surpassede0
Comparator
BWe0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“irrigation with M-BW1or M-BW2surpassed irrigation with BW in all tested growth parameters (plant height, branches and leaf number/plant, leaf area, dry matter of leaves, stem and total plant,and total chlorophyll); leaf anatomy(instance, mid vein and lamina thickness, length and width of leaf vascular bundle and lower and upper epidermis thickness); stem anatomy(stem diameter and thickness of cortex, xylem and phloem in addition pith diameter)and chemical analysis for mineral content (N, P, K, Mg, Fe, Cu, Zn ) at 85 days after sowing (DAS)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 999–1544 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

growth parameters improved by 10.78-16.02% under magnetized brackish water.

Treatment
irrigation with brackish-watere0
Outcome
growth parameterse0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
10.78-16.02%e0
Comparator
brackish-watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the percent of improvement compared to irrigation with brackish-water ranged between 10.78-16.02% for growth parameters, 28.33-31.76% for dry matter of plant; 15.58 -80.81% for leaf;10.71-63.88% for stems and2.42-54.48% for mineral content of leaves at 85 DAS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1643–1902 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

dry matter of plant improved by 28.33-31.76% under magnetized brackish water.

Treatment
irrigation with brackish-watere0
Outcome
dry matter of plante0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
28.33-31.76%e0
Comparator
brackish-watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the percent of improvement compared to irrigation with brackish-water ranged between 10.78-16.02% for growth parameters, 28.33-31.76% for dry matter of plant; 15.58 -80.81% for leaf;10.71-63.88% for stems and2.42-54.48% for mineral content of leaves at 85 DAS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1643–1902 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

leaf improved by 15.58 -80.81% under magnetized brackish water.

Treatment
irrigation with brackish-watere0
Outcome
leafe0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
15.58 -80.81%e0
Comparator
brackish-watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the percent of improvement compared to irrigation with brackish-water ranged between 10.78-16.02% for growth parameters, 28.33-31.76% for dry matter of plant; 15.58 -80.81% for leaf;10.71-63.88% for stems and2.42-54.48% for mineral content of leaves at 85 DAS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1643–1902 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

stems improved by 10.71-63.88% under magnetized brackish water.

Treatment
irrigation with brackish-watere0
Outcome
stemse0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
10.71-63.88%e0
Comparator
brackish-watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the percent of improvement compared to irrigation with brackish-water ranged between 10.78-16.02% for growth parameters, 28.33-31.76% for dry matter of plant; 15.58 -80.81% for leaf;10.71-63.88% for stems and2.42-54.48% for mineral content of leaves at 85 DAS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1643–1902 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

mineral content of leaves improved by 2.42-54.48% under magnetized brackish water.

Treatment
irrigation with brackish-watere0
Outcome
mineral content of leavese0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
2.42-54.48%e0
Comparator
brackish-watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the percent of improvement compared to irrigation with brackish-water ranged between 10.78-16.02% for growth parameters, 28.33-31.76% for dry matter of plant; 15.58 -80.81% for leaf;10.71-63.88% for stems and2.42-54.48% for mineral content of leaves at 85 DAS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1643–1902 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Na decreased under magnetic brackish water.

Treatment
magnetic brackish water treatmentse0
Outcome
Nae0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
66.08e0
Comparator
BW water treatmente0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Na, and proline),where these decrease dunder both magnetic brackish water treatments by 66.08 and 43.75%, respectively (average of both magnetically brackish-water treatments compared to BW water treatment)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1988–2194 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

proline decreased under magnetic brackish water.

Treatment
magnetic brackish water treatmentse0
Outcome
prolinee0
Direction
decreasee0
Value
43.75%e0
Comparator
BW water treatmente0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Na, and proline),where these decrease dunder both magnetic brackish water treatments by 66.08 and 43.75%, respectively (average of both magnetically brackish-water treatments compared to BW water treatment)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1988–2194 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

yield components improved under magnetic brackish water.

Treatment
magnetic water technologyt0
Outcome
yield componentse0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
9.35and35.98e0
Comparator
brackish watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The percent of improvement ranged between 9.35and35.98 for yield components and reached1.29,19.66 and21.30% in seed oil percentage, seeds and oil yield (kg fed-1;fed=4200m2), respectively compared to brackish water.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2440–2655 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

seed oil percentage improved under magnetic brackish water.

Treatment
magnetic water technologyt0
Outcome
seed oil percentagee0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
1.29e0
Comparator
brackish watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The percent of improvement ranged between 9.35and35.98 for yield components and reached1.29,19.66 and21.30% in seed oil percentage, seeds and oil yield (kg fed-1;fed=4200m2), respectively compared to brackish water.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2440–2655 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

seeds improved under magnetic brackish water.

Treatment
magnetic water technologyt0
Outcome
seedse0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
19.66e0
Comparator
brackish watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The percent of improvement ranged between 9.35and35.98 for yield components and reached1.29,19.66 and21.30% in seed oil percentage, seeds and oil yield (kg fed-1;fed=4200m2), respectively compared to brackish water.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2440–2655 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

oil yield improved under magnetic brackish water.

Treatment
magnetic water technologyt0
Outcome
oil yielde0
Direction
improvemente0
Value
21.30%e0
Comparator
brackish watere0

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

Brassica napus var. napus
Brassica napus var. napus · Taxoncontri from Yonezawa-Shi, Yamagata, Japan · CC BY-SA 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The percent of improvement ranged between 9.35and35.98 for yield components and reached1.29,19.66 and21.30% in seed oil percentage, seeds and oil yield (kg fed-1;fed=4200m2), respectively compared to brackish water.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2440–2655 · show in text ↑
t0

“Salinity stress mitigation of some canola cultivars grown under South Sinai conditions using magnetic water technology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–118 · show in text ↑

irrigation · growth · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 8 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

irrigation · physiology: osmolytes · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

irrigation · nutrient: content · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 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.