Abstract
To assess the effects of straw return coupled with deep nitrogen (N) fertilization on grain yield and N use efficiency (NUE) in mechanical pot-seedling transplanting (MPST) rice, the seedlings of two rice cultivars, i.e., Yuxiangyouzhan and Wufengyou 615 transplanted by MPST were applied with N fertilizer at 150 kg/hm2 and straw return at 6 t/hm2 in early seasons of 2019 and 2020. The experiment comprised of following treatments: CK (no fertilizer and no straw return), MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return), MBS (broadcasting fertilizer and straw return), MD (deep N fertilization without straw return), MB (broadcasting fertilizer without straw return). Results depicted that the MDS treatment significantly increased the rice yield by 41.69%–72.22% due to total above-ground biomass, leaf area index and photosynthesis increased by 54.70%–55.80%, 38.52%–52.17% and 17.89%–28.40%, respectively, compared to the MB treatment. In addition, the MDS treatment enhanced the total N accumulation by 37.74%–43.69%, N recovery efficiency by 141.45%–164.65%, N agronomic efficiency by 121.76%–134.19%, nitrate reductase by 46.46%–60.86% and glutamine synthetase by 23.56%–31.02%, compared to the MB treatment. The average grain yield and NUE in both years for Yuxiangyouzhan were higher in the MDS treatment than in the MD treatment. Hence, deep N fertilization combined with straw return can be an innovative technique with improved grain yield and NUE in MPST in South China.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) significantly increased rice yield by 41.69%–72.22% compared with broadcast fertilization without straw (MB).
- Taxon
- rice
Oryza sativae1 - Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne2
- Outcome
- rice yielde1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 41.69%–72.22%e1
- Comparator
- MB treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the MDS treatment significantly increased the rice yield by 41.69%–72.22% due to total above-ground biomass, leaf area index and photosynthesis increased by 54.70%–55.80%, 38.52%–52.17% and 17.89%–28.40%, respectively, compared to the MB treatment”
e2“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) increased total above-ground biomass by 54.70%–55.80% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae1
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne2
- Outcome
- total above-ground biomasse1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 54.70%–55.80%e1
- Comparator
- MB treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the MDS treatment significantly increased the rice yield by 41.69%–72.22% due to total above-ground biomass, leaf area index and photosynthesis increased by 54.70%–55.80%, 38.52%–52.17% and 17.89%–28.40%, respectively, compared to the MB treatment”
e2“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) increased leaf area index by 38.52%–52.17% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae1
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne2
- Outcome
- leaf area indexe1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 38.52%–52.17%e1
- Comparator
- MB treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the MDS treatment significantly increased the rice yield by 41.69%–72.22% due to total above-ground biomass, leaf area index and photosynthesis increased by 54.70%–55.80%, 38.52%–52.17% and 17.89%–28.40%, respectively, compared to the MB treatment”
e2“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) increased photosynthesis by 17.89%–28.40% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae1
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne2
- Outcome
- photosynthesise1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Value
- 17.89%–28.40%e1
- Comparator
- MB treatmente1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“the MDS treatment significantly increased the rice yield by 41.69%–72.22% due to total above-ground biomass, leaf area index and photosynthesis increased by 54.70%–55.80%, 38.52%–52.17% and 17.89%–28.40%, respectively, compared to the MB treatment”
e2“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) enhanced total N accumulation by 37.74%–43.69% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne3
- Outcome
- total N accumulatione2
- Direction
- enhancede2
- Value
- 37.74%–43.69%e2
- Comparator
- MB treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“the MDS treatment enhanced the total N accumulation by 37.74%–43.69%, N recovery efficiency by 141.45%–164.65%, N agronomic efficiency by 121.76%–134.19%, nitrate reductase by 46.46%–60.86% and glutamine synthetase by 23.56%–31.02%, compared to the MB treatment”
e3“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
e4“two rice cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) enhanced N recovery efficiency by 141.45%–164.65% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne3
- Outcome
- N recovery efficiencye2
- Direction
- enhancede2
- Value
- 141.45%–164.65%e2
- Comparator
- MB treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“the MDS treatment enhanced the total N accumulation by 37.74%–43.69%, N recovery efficiency by 141.45%–164.65%, N agronomic efficiency by 121.76%–134.19%, nitrate reductase by 46.46%–60.86% and glutamine synthetase by 23.56%–31.02%, compared to the MB treatment”
e3“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
e4“two rice cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) enhanced N agronomic efficiency by 121.76%–134.19% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne3
- Outcome
- N agronomic efficiencye2
- Direction
- enhancede2
- Value
- 121.76%–134.19%e2
- Comparator
- MB treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“the MDS treatment enhanced the total N accumulation by 37.74%–43.69%, N recovery efficiency by 141.45%–164.65%, N agronomic efficiency by 121.76%–134.19%, nitrate reductase by 46.46%–60.86% and glutamine synthetase by 23.56%–31.02%, compared to the MB treatment”
e3“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
e4“two rice cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) enhanced nitrate reductase by 46.46%–60.86% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne3
- Outcome
- nitrate reductasee2
- Direction
- enhancede2
- Value
- 46.46%–60.86%e2
- Comparator
- MB treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“the MDS treatment enhanced the total N accumulation by 37.74%–43.69%, N recovery efficiency by 141.45%–164.65%, N agronomic efficiency by 121.76%–134.19%, nitrate reductase by 46.46%–60.86% and glutamine synthetase by 23.56%–31.02%, compared to the MB treatment”
e3“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
e4“two rice cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization with straw return (MDS) enhanced glutamine synthetase by 23.56%–31.02% compared with MB.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Treatment
- deep N fertilization and straw returne3
- Outcome
- glutamine synthetasee2
- Direction
- enhancede2
- Value
- 23.56%–31.02%e2
- Comparator
- MB treatmente2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“the MDS treatment enhanced the total N accumulation by 37.74%–43.69%, N recovery efficiency by 141.45%–164.65%, N agronomic efficiency by 121.76%–134.19%, nitrate reductase by 46.46%–60.86% and glutamine synthetase by 23.56%–31.02%, compared to the MB treatment”
e3“MDS (deep N fertilization and straw return)”
e4“two rice cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
For Yuxiangyouzhan, average grain yield over both years was higher with MDS than with MD.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Material
- Yuxiangyouzhane5
- Treatment
- MDS treatmente5
- Outcome
- grain yielde5
- Direction
- highere5
- Comparator
- MD treatmente5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“The average grain yield and NUE in both years for Yuxiangyouzhan were higher in the MDS treatment than in the MD treatment”
e4“two rice cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
For Yuxiangyouzhan, average NUE over both years was higher with MDS than with MD.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Material
- Yuxiangyouzhane5
- Treatment
- MDS treatmente5
- Outcome
- NUEe5
- Direction
- highere5
- Comparator
- MD treatmente5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“The average grain yield and NUE in both years for Yuxiangyouzhan were higher in the MDS treatment than in the MD treatment”
e4“two rice cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Deep N fertilization combined with straw return is recommended as an innovative technique for improved grain yield and NUE in MPST rice in South China.
- Taxon
- riceOryza sativae4
- Outcome
- grain yield and NUEe6
- Setting
- South Chinae6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“deep N fertilization combined with straw return can be an innovative technique with improved grain yield and NUE in MPST in South China”
e4“two rice cultivars”
The same questions in other papers
organic · growth · Oryza sativa (rice)Results differ
63 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- negative
75 papers more in this group
See all 79 papers →organic · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →organic · molecular: metabolites · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →fertilization · physiology: enzyme activity · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
29 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →fertilization · physiology: photosynthesis · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
79 papers more in this group
See all 83 papers →organic · nutrient: content · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
95 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
102 papers more in this group
See all 106 papers →fertilization · molecular: metabolites · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
198 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
215 papers more in this group
See all 219 papers →fertilization · nutrient: efficiency · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results
201 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
216 papers more in this group
See all 220 papers →8 of 14 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.