Abstract
Changing climates and frequent spells of drought have increased the risk of crop failure, especially in arid and semi-arid regions, thus multiplying the vulnerability of food-insecure populations. The exogenous application of potassium (K) can potentially ameliorate the adverse effects of drought in maize by maintaining cell osmotic potential and turgidity, provided its optimum doses are applied. The present experiment comprised two maize cultivars, viz. Islamabad Gold (drought tolerant) and Azam (drought susceptible), grown under well-watered (80% water-holding capacity (WHC)), mild drought (60% WHC) and severe drought (40% WHC) conditions. Different doses of K, viz. 0%, 1% and 2%, were also tested to screen out the most superior concentration. Drought stress markedly reduced root and shoot lengths (25% and 16%, respectively) along with their dry weights (20% and 10%, respectively). Moreover, a substantial reduction in leaf relative water content (RWC) (24%), stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis rates, chlorophyll pigments a, b and total chlorophyll contents (31%) were recorded, compared with well-watered conditions. However, foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentration outperformed other doses by improving growth attributes, RWC (10%), total chlorophyll (9%) and proline (12%) under severe drought conditions. Our findings confirmed the effectiveness of foliage-applied K2SO4 in ameliorating drought effects in rainfed maize; however, more doses and sources of K could be tested for developing it as a potent source to cope with water stress.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress reduced root and shoot lengths of maize.
- Treatment
- Drought stresse1
- Outcome
- root and shoot lengthse1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 25% and 16%e1
- Qualifier
- respectivelye1
- Comparator
- well-watered conditionse2
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e1“Drought stress markedly reduced root and shoot lengths (25% and 16%, respectively) along with their dry weights (20% and 10%, respectively)”
e2“compared with well-watered conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress reduced dry weights of maize roots and shoots.
- Treatment
- Drought stresse1
- Outcome
- dry weightse1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Value
- 20% and 10%e1
- Qualifier
- respectivelye1
- Comparator
- well-watered conditionse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e1“Drought stress markedly reduced root and shoot lengths (25% and 16%, respectively) along with their dry weights (20% and 10%, respectively)”
e2“compared with well-watered conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress reduced leaf relative water content of maize by 24%.
- Treatment
- Drought stresse1
- Outcome
- leaf relative water content (RWC)e3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 24%e3
- Comparator
- well-watered conditionse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e1“Drought stress markedly reduced root and shoot lengths (25% and 16%, respectively)”
e2“compared with well-watered conditions”
e3“a substantial reduction in leaf relative water content (RWC) (24%), stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis rates, chlorophyll pigments a, b and total chlorophyll contents (31%) were recorded”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress reduced stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis rates of maize.
- Treatment
- Drought stresse1
- Outcome
- stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis ratese3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Comparator
- well-watered conditionse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e1“Drought stress markedly reduced root and shoot lengths (25% and 16%, respectively)”
e2“compared with well-watered conditions”
e3“a substantial reduction in leaf relative water content (RWC) (24%), stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis rates, chlorophyll pigments a, b and total chlorophyll contents (31%) were recorded”
Claim · model-written summary
Drought stress reduced chlorophyll pigments a, b and total chlorophyll contents of maize by 31%.
- Treatment
- Drought stresse1
- Outcome
- chlorophyll pigments a, b and total chlorophyll contentse3
- Direction
- reductione3
- Value
- 31%e3
- Comparator
- well-watered conditionse2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e1“Drought stress markedly reduced root and shoot lengths (25% and 16%, respectively)”
e2“compared with well-watered conditions”
e3“a substantial reduction in leaf relative water content (RWC) (24%), stomatal conductance, transpiration and photosynthesis rates, chlorophyll pigments a, b and total chlorophyll contents (31%) were recorded”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar K2SO4 at 2% outperformed other doses by improving growth attributes of drought-stressed maize.
- Treatment
- foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentratione4
- Outcome
- growth attributese4
- Direction
- improvinge4
- Comparator
- other dosese4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e4“foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentration outperformed other doses by improving growth attributes”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar K2SO4 at 2% improved relative water content (10%) of drought-stressed maize.
- Treatment
- foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentratione4
- Outcome
- RWCe5
- Direction
- improvinge5
- Value
- 10%e5
- Comparator
- other dosese4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e4“foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentration outperformed other doses by improving growth attributes”
e5“improving growth attributes, RWC (10%), total chlorophyll (9%) and proline (12%) under severe drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar K2SO4 at 2% improved total chlorophyll (9%) of drought-stressed maize.
- Treatment
- foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentratione4
- Outcome
- total chlorophylle5
- Direction
- improvinge5
- Value
- 9%e5
- Comparator
- other dosese4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e4“foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentration outperformed other doses by improving growth attributes”
e5“improving growth attributes, RWC (10%), total chlorophyll (9%) and proline (12%) under severe drought conditions”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar K2SO4 at 2% improved proline (12%) of drought-stressed maize.
- Treatment
- foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentratione4
- Outcome
- prolinee5
- Direction
- improvinge5
- Value
- 12%e5
- Comparator
- other dosese4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Drought-Stressed Maize”
e4“foliar application of K2SO4 at 2% concentration outperformed other doses by improving growth attributes”
e5“improving growth attributes, RWC (10%), total chlorophyll (9%) and proline (12%) under severe drought conditions”
The same questions in other papers
potassium sulfate · physiology: pigments · Zea mays (maize)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
application · physiology: osmolytes · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →application · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →drought · physiology: pigments · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
74 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
81 papers more in this group
See all 85 papers →application · physiology: pigments · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
83 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
85 papers more in this group
See all 89 papers →drought · physiology: photosynthesis · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
107 papers in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
117 papers more in this group
See all 121 papers →drought · physiology: water · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
115 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
151 papers more in this group
See all 155 papers →application · growth · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
309 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
333 papers more in this group
See all 337 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.