Paper · 2011 · Fayoum Journal of Agricultural Research and Development /Fayoum Journal of Agricultural Research and Development

EFFECT OF UREA, SOME MICRONUTRIENTS AND TWO GROWTH REGULATORS FOLIAR SPRAYS ON VEGETATIVE GROWTH, YIELD AND FRUIT QUALITY OF WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES

Ensherah A. H. Tayeh; Eman A. A. El-Khalek; Zeinab A. I; et al.

18
claims
36
verbatim quotes
0
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

This investigation was carried out during the two successive seasons 2008and 2009 on 25- years old Washington Navel orange trees grown in anorchard at El- Nobaria sector, El- Behera governorate to study the effect offoliar spraying with urea (0.5%), a mixture of Zn (0.4%), Mn (0.3%),Fe(o.5%) and Cu (0.3%) in sulphate salts form (23% Zn, 28% Mn, 19% Feand 30%Cu), respectively and two growth regulators, GA3 at 25 ppm andNAA at 10ppm. The trees spraying were two ones, the first before flowering(the third week of Feb.), and the second spraying applied four weeks afterfruit set to study the effect of these treatments on some vegetative growthcharacters and leaf mineral contents, Fruiting aspects (set, drop and Preharvest drop) percentage, yield per tree by number and weight, as well as theaverage weight of fruits and some fruit physical and chemical properties. Theobtained results showed that the treatments included spraying Urea&micronutrients (Zn, Mn, Fe and Cu), Urea and NAA achieved the highestvalues for average leaf area and shoot diameter. Regarding shoot length,Urea& micronutrients followed by GA3 had the highest values. Leaf analysisshowed that the highest values of leaf N content obtained by using Urea,Urea& micronutrients, GA3 and NAA, respectively. The lowered values ofleaf N content recorded when using micronutrients treatment followed bycontrol. All treatments were significantly effective in increasing fruit set andreducing fruit drop as compared with control. Application of NAA, Urea &micronutrients and GA3 significantly increased fruit set percentage andreduced June and pre-harvest fruit drop, however NAA was more effective inreducing fruit drop than GA3. Spraying Washington Navel orange trees withUrea & micronutrients and NAA significantly increased the number of fruitper tree, yield per tree. However, the treatment included both of Urea &micronutrients Followed by GA3 were the most effective in increasing fruitweight and pulp weight. Spraying of Urea and micronutrients slightly reducedjuice acidity and increased T.S.S., total sugars and ascorbic acid contents aswell as T.S.S./ acid ratio. In the contrary, either of GA3 or NAA caused thesame increase in ascorbic acid content in the juice.

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 18

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea with micronutrients produced high leaf area and shoot diameter.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Urea&micronutrients (Zn, Mn, Fe and Cu)e0
Outcome
average leaf area and shoot diametere0
Direction
highestvaluese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“spraying Urea&micronutrients (Zn, Mn, Fe and Cu), Urea and NAA achieved the highestvalues for average leaf area and shoot diameter”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 925–1055 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea alone produced high leaf area and shoot diameter.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Ureae0
Outcome
average leaf area and shoot diametere0
Direction
highestvaluese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“spraying Urea&micronutrients (Zn, Mn, Fe and Cu), Urea and NAA achieved the highestvalues for average leaf area and shoot diameter”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 925–1055 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA produced high leaf area and shoot diameter.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
average leaf area and shoot diametere0
Direction
highestvaluese0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“spraying Urea&micronutrients (Zn, Mn, Fe and Cu), Urea and NAA achieved the highestvalues for average leaf area and shoot diameter”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 925–1055 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea with micronutrients gave the highest shoot length.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Urea& micronutrientse0
Outcome
shoot lengthe0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Regarding shoot length,Urea& micronutrients followed by GA3 had the highest values”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1057–1139 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GA3 gave high shoot length following urea with micronutrients.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
GA3e0
Outcome
shoot lengthe0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
Urea& micronutrientse0

Verbatim

e0

“Regarding shoot length,Urea& micronutrients followed by GA3 had the highest values”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1057–1139 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea produced the highest leaf nitrogen content.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Ureae0
Outcome
leaf N contente0
Direction
higheste0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“the highest values of leaf N content obtained by using Urea,Urea& micronutrients, GA3 and NAA, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1166–1273 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Micronutrients alone produced low leaf nitrogen content.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
micronutrients treatmente0
Outcome
leaf N contente0
Direction
lowerede0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“The lowered values ofleaf N content recorded when using micronutrients treatment followed bycontrol.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1275–1375 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

All spray treatments significantly increased fruit set versus control.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
All treatmentse0
Outcome
fruit sete0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“All treatments were significantly effective in increasing fruit set andreducing fruit drop as compared with control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1376–1492 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

All spray treatments significantly reduced fruit drop versus control.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
All treatmentse0
Outcome
fruit drope0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
controle0

Verbatim

e0

“All treatments were significantly effective in increasing fruit set andreducing fruit drop as compared with control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1376–1492 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA reduced fruit drop more effectively than GA3.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
fruit drope0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
GA3e0

Verbatim

e0

“NAA was more effective inreducing fruit drop than GA3”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1639–1692 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea with micronutrients significantly increased fruit number and yield per tree.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Urea & micronutrientse0
Outcome
number of fruitper tree, yield per treee0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Urea & micronutrients and NAA significantly increased the number of fruitper tree, yield per tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1737–1834 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA significantly increased fruit number and yield per tree.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
number of fruitper tree, yield per treee0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Urea & micronutrients and NAA significantly increased the number of fruitper tree, yield per tree”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1737–1834 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea with micronutrients most effectively increased fruit and pulp weight.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Urea &micronutrientse0
Outcome
fruitweight and pulp weighte0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Urea &micronutrients Followed by GA3 were the most effective in increasing fruitweight and pulp weight”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1876–1978 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GA3 also increased fruit and pulp weight.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
GA3e0
Outcome
fruitweight and pulp weighte0
Direction
increasinge0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Urea &micronutrients Followed by GA3 were the most effective in increasing fruitweight and pulp weight”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1876–1978 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea plus micronutrients slightly reduced juice acidity.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Urea and micronutrientse0
Outcome
juice aciditye0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Spraying of Urea and micronutrients slightly reducedjuice acidity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1980–2045 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Urea plus micronutrients increased soluble solids, total sugars, ascorbic acid and soluble-solids-to-acid ratio.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
Urea and micronutrientse0
Outcome
T.S.S., total sugars and ascorbic acid contentse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Spraying of Urea and micronutrients slightly reducedjuice acidity and increased T.S.S., total sugars and ascorbic acid contents aswell as T.S.S./ acid ratio.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1980–2137 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GA3 increased juice ascorbic acid content.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
GA3e0
Outcome
ascorbic acid content in the juicee0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“either of GA3 or NAA caused thesame increase in ascorbic acid content in the juice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2155–2237 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA increased juice ascorbic acid content.

Taxon
WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREESt0
Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
ascorbic acid content in the juicee0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“either of GA3 or NAA caused thesame increase in ascorbic acid content in the juice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2155–2237 · show in text ↑
t0

“WASHINGTON NAVEL ORANGE TREES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 125–154 · show in text ↑

zinc atom · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results differ

14 papers: 11 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

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

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 papers →

manganese atom · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

copper atom · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

1-naphthaleneacetic acid · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

iron atom · growth · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 10 positive, 1 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

1-naphthaleneacetic acid · quality: phytochemicals · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

1-naphthaleneacetic acid · yield · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results agree

10 papers: 10 positive, 0 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 papers →

nitrogen · nutrient: content · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results differ

12 papers: 8 positive, 4 negative or no effect

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

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

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

8 of 15 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.