Paper · 2004 · Agronomy Journal

Grain Yield and Kernel Smut of Rice as Affected by Preflood and Midseason Nitrogen Fertilization in Arkansas

Nathan A. Slaton; Edward E. Gbur; Richard D. Cartwright; et al.

10
claims
20
verbatim quotes
12
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Kernel smut, Neovossia horrida (Tilletia barclayana), of rice (Oryza sativa L.) has been a persistent disease in Arkansas for more than 50 yr. Recently, epidemic levels of kernel smut have occurred on highly susceptible cultivars, which have increased awareness within the rice industry of this disease. Nitrogen fertilization treatments consisting of four preflood (50–152 kg N ha−1) and three midseason (0–100 kg N ha−1) N rates were arranged in a factorial design and used to delineate the effects of N rate and application timing on rice yield and disease incidence and severity in five site-year–cultivar studies (environments). Significant environment × preflood N rate interactions occurred for yield, incidence, and severity. The minimum preflood N rates, averaged across midseason N rates, that produced maximum yields varied among the environments and ranged from 84 to 152 kg N ha−1. Depending on the environment, disease incidence ranged from 2 to 93% and severity ranged from <0.1 to 4.8% among preflood N rates. Preflood N rate had no significant effect on smut incidence and severity for three environments receiving optimum-to-excessive N and a fourth environment receiving inadequate-to-optimum N. For the remaining environment that received optimum-to-excessive N, incidence increased linearly (43–93%), and severity increased nonlinearly (0.5–4.8%) as preflood N rate increased. Midseason N rate did not affect severity but caused a positive, linear increase for incidence. Data suggest that excessive preflood N has the greater potential to increase kernel smut but only when environmental conditions are favorable for kernel smut.

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 10

Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Environment and preflood N rate interacted significantly for yield, incidence and severity.

Treatment
preflood N ratee0
Outcome
yield, incidence, and severitye0

Not reportedDirection

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Significant environment × preflood N rate interactions occurred for yield, incidence, and severity.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 634–733 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Preflood N rates for maximum yield ranged from 84 to 152 kg N ha−1.

Outcome
maximum yieldse0
Value
84 to 152 kg N ha−1e0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The minimum preflood N rates, averaged across midseason N rates, that produced maximum yields varied among the environments and ranged from 84 to 152 kg N ha−1.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 734–894 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Smut incidence ranged from 2 to 93%.

Outcome
disease incidencee0
Value
2 to 93%e0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Depending on the environment, disease incidence ranged from 2 to 93% and severity ranged from <0.1 to 4.8% among preflood N rates.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 895–1025 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Smut severity ranged from <0.1 to 4.8%.

Outcome
severitye0
Value
<0.1 to 4.8%e0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Depending on the environment, disease incidence ranged from 2 to 93% and severity ranged from <0.1 to 4.8% among preflood N rates.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 895–1025 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Preflood N rate had no significant effect on smut incidence and severity in four environments.

Treatment
Preflood N ratee0
Outcome
smut incidence and severitye0
Direction
no significant effecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Preflood N rate had no significant effect on smut incidence and severity for three environments receiving optimum-to-excessive N and a fourth environment receiving inadequate-to-optimum N.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1026–1214 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Smut incidence increased linearly from 43 to 93% with preflood N rate in one environment.

Treatment
preflood N ratee0
Outcome
incidencee0
Direction
increased linearlye0
Value
43–93%e0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“incidence increased linearly (43–93%), and severity increased nonlinearly (0.5–4.8%) as preflood N rate increased.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1283–1397 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Smut severity increased nonlinearly from 0.5 to 4.8% with preflood N rate.

Treatment
preflood N ratee0
Outcome
severitye0
Direction
increased nonlinearlye0
Value
0.5–4.8%e0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“incidence increased linearly (43–93%), and severity increased nonlinearly (0.5–4.8%) as preflood N rate increased.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1283–1397 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Midseason N rate did not affect smut severity.

Treatment
Midseason N ratee0
Outcome
severitye0
Direction
did not affecte0

Not reportedComparator

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Midseason N rate did not affect severity but caused a positive, linear increase for incidence.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1398–1492 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Midseason N rate increased smut incidence linearly.

Treatment
Midseason N ratee0
Outcome
incidencee0
Direction
increasee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Midseason N rate did not affect severity but caused a positive, linear increase for incidence.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1398–1492 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Excessive preflood N may increase smut when environmental conditions favor it.

Outcome
potential to increase kernel smute0

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

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Data suggest that excessive preflood N has the greater potential to increase kernel smut but only when environmental conditions are favorable for kernel smut.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1493–1651 · show in text ↑
t0

“Rice”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–35 · show in text ↑

nitrogen · disease · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

82 papers: 39 positive, 43 negative or no effect

42 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

78 papers more in this group

See all 82 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.