Paper · 2012 · AFRICAN JOURNAL OF BIOTECHNOLOGY

Effects of sulphur and zinc applications on growth and nutrition of bread wheat in calcareous clay loam soil

Şule Orman

18
claims
35
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of sulphur (S) and zinc (Zn) on soil pH and electrical conductivity (EC), nitrogen (N), S, iron (Fe), Zn, N:S ratio; and straw and grain dry weight of wheat grown in a calcareous clay loam soil. For this purpose, a pot experiment was conducted in greenhouse conditions. Sulphur was applied at 0, 10, 50, 250 mg Skg-1 (as CaSO4.2H2O) and zinc at 0, 5 mg Znkg-1 (as ZnSO4.7H2O) to the soil. The soil pH decreased by S alone. The soil EC increased due to increase in sulphur with zinc. The straw S concentration increased by sulphur alone. In the 250 mg Skg-1 application to soil, the straw S concentration increased by 28.13% when compared with 0 mg Skg-1 treatment. The concentrations of grain S and Fe, straw Zn, straw and grain N and N:S ratios were not significantly affected by sulphur and zinc. The grain Zn concentration was significantly increased by sulphur with zinc. In the 250 mg Skg-1 with 5 mg Znkg-1 application to the soil, the grain Zn concentration increased 38.47% when compared with no sulphur and zinc treatment to soil. The zinc treatment led to a significantly reduced straw Fe concentration. The straw dry weight was significantly affected by sulphur alone and it increased from 2.53 to 3.86%. The grain dry weight was significantly affected by zinc alone and it decreased by 12.18%. But, the grain zinc concentration increased 25% by increasing the zinc. The results suggest that application of sulphur and zinc could be a good approach for the nutrition of wheat plants. However, the generated salinity was high for sulphur applications, which means that plants might be faced high salinity problems. Also, with the application of high sulphur to plants, it should be considered that an N:S imbalance can occur. On the other hand, N:S imbalance can occur in crops grown in high N fertility in especially, S-deficient soils. Therefore, the levels of electrical conductivity, pH, texture, CaCO3, organic matter, sulphur and nitrogen of soils and cultivated plant species should be taken into consideration when recommending sulphur and zinc application to soils. Key words: Sulphur, zinc, soil pH, soil salinity, calcareous soil, wheat, N, Fe, Zn, N:S ratio.

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 18

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur alone decreased soil pH.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
S alonee1
Outcome
soil pHe1
Direction
decreasede1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“The soil pH decreased by S alone”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 445–477 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing sulphur with zinc increased soil EC.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
increase in sulphur with zince2
Outcome
soil ECe2
Direction
increasede2

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e2

“The soil EC increased due to increase in sulphur with zinc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 479–537 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur alone increased straw S concentration.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
strawe3
Treatment
sulphur alonee3
Outcome
straw S concentratione3
Direction
increasede3

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e3

“The straw S concentration increased by sulphur alone”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 539–591 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 250 mg S/kg soil, straw S concentration rose by 28.13% relative to 0 mg S/kg.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
strawe4
Treatment
250 mg Skg-1 application to soile4
Outcome
straw S concentratione4
Direction
increasede4
Value
28.13%e4
Comparator
0 mg Skg-1 treatmente4

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e4

“In the 250 mg Skg-1 application to soil, the straw S concentration increased by 28.13% when compared with 0 mg Skg-1 treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 593–719 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur and zinc did not significantly change grain S and Fe concentrations.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
graine5
Treatment
sulphur and zince5
Outcome
grain S and Fee5
Direction
no_changeinferrede5

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e5

“The concentrations of grain S and Fe, straw Zn, straw and grain N and N:S ratios were not significantly affected by sulphur and zinc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 721–853 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur and zinc did not significantly change straw Zn concentration.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
strawe5
Treatment
sulphur and zince5
Outcome
straw Zne5
Direction
no_changeinferrede5

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e5

“The concentrations of grain S and Fe, straw Zn, straw and grain N and N:S ratios were not significantly affected by sulphur and zinc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 721–853 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur and zinc did not significantly change straw and grain N concentrations.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
straw and graine5
Treatment
sulphur and zince5
Outcome
straw and grain Ne5
Direction
no_changeinferrede5

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e5

“The concentrations of grain S and Fe, straw Zn, straw and grain N and N:S ratios were not significantly affected by sulphur and zinc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 721–853 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur and zinc did not significantly change N:S ratios.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
sulphur and zince5
Outcome
N:S ratiose5
Direction
no_changeinferrede5

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e5

“The concentrations of grain S and Fe, straw Zn, straw and grain N and N:S ratios were not significantly affected by sulphur and zinc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 721–853 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur with zinc significantly increased grain Zn concentration.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
graine6
Treatment
sulphur with zince6
Outcome
grain Zn concentratione6
Direction
increasede6

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e6

“The grain Zn concentration was significantly increased by sulphur with zinc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 855–930 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At 250 mg S/kg with 5 mg Zn/kg, grain Zn concentration rose by 38.47% relative to no sulphur and zinc.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
graine7
Treatment
250 mg Skg-1 with 5 mg Znkg-1 application to the soile7
Outcome
grain Zn concentratione7
Direction
increasede7
Value
38.47%e7
Comparator
no sulphur and zinc treatment to soile7

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e7

“In the 250 mg Skg-1 with 5 mg Znkg-1 application to the soil, the grain Zn concentration increased 38.47% when compared with no sulphur and zinc treatment to soil”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 932–1094 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc treatment significantly reduced straw Fe concentration.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
strawe1
Treatment
zinc treatmente1
Outcome
straw Fe concentratione1
Direction
reducede1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“The zinc treatment led to a significantly reduced straw Fe concentration”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1096–1168 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur alone significantly increased straw dry weight, from 2.53 to 3.86%.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
strawe1
Treatment
sulphur alonee1
Outcome
straw dry weighte1
Direction
increasede1
Value
2.53 to 3.86%e1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“The straw dry weight was significantly affected by sulphur alone and it increased from 2.53 to 3.86%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1170–1270 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc alone significantly decreased grain dry weight by 12.18%.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
graine1
Treatment
zinc alonee1
Outcome
grain dry weighte1
Direction
decreasede1
Value
12.18%e1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“The grain dry weight was significantly affected by zinc alone and it decreased by 12.18%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1272–1360 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing zinc raised grain zinc concentration by 25%.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
graine1
Treatment
increasing the zince1
Outcome
grain zinc concentratione1
Direction
increasede1
Value
25%e1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“But, the grain zinc concentration increased 25% by increasing the zinc”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1362–1432 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Applying sulphur and zinc could be a good approach for the nutrition of wheat plants.

Treatment
application of sulphur and zince1
Outcome
nutrition of wheat plantse1

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

e1

“application of sulphur and zinc could be a good approach for the nutrition of wheat plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1459–1549 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sulphur applications raised generated salinity, which may cause salinity problems for plants.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
sulphur applicationse1
Outcome
generated salinitye1
Direction
highe1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“However, the generated salinity was high for sulphur applications”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1551–1616 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

With high sulphur application an N:S imbalance should be considered.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Treatment
application of high sulphure1
Outcome
N:S imbalancee1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“with the application of high sulphur to plants, it should be considered that an N:S imbalance can occur”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1687–1790 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Soil electrical conductivity, pH, texture, CaCO3, organic matter, sulphur and nitrogen levels should be considered before recommending sulphur and zinc application to soils.

Taxon
bread wheatTriticum aestivumt0
Outcome
levels of electrical conductivity, pH, texture, CaCO3, organic matter, sulphur and nitrogen of soilse1

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

t0

“bread wheat”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 68–79 · show in text ↑
e1

“the levels of electrical conductivity, pH, texture, CaCO3, organic matter, sulphur and nitrogen of soils and cultivated plant species should be taken into consideration when recommending sulphur and zinc application to soils”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1915–2139 · show in text ↑

sulfur atom · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

66 papers: 51 positive, 15 negative or no effect

50 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

62 papers more in this group

See all 66 papers →

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

200 papers: 155 positive, 45 negative or no effect

44 papers in the same direction as this paper · 155 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

196 papers more in this group

See all 200 papers →

zinc atom · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

380 papers: 347 positive, 33 negative or no effect

346 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

376 papers more in this group

See all 380 papers →

sulfur atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

33 papers: 31 positive, 2 negative or no effect

30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. positive

29 papers more in this group

See all 33 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.