Abstract
Previous studies have shown positive yield responses from foliar copper (Cu) applications to beet. However, some of these responses may have been due to fungicidal instead of nutritional effects. Also, since these studies, national yields have increased possibly increasing the Cu requirement of the beet crop. So, between 1987 and 1990 six field experiments tested the effect of foliar sprays of copper on the yield and processing quality of sugar beet. The copper was applied as Cu oxychloride or an inorganic Cu formulation, in factorial combination with a wetter or an adjuvant. Four of the experiments were on loamy sand textured soils, the remainder on peaty soils. The Cu sprays did not affect beet yields for crops grown on the peat soils. On two of the light textured mineral soils the Cu sprays did increase yield, but there was no clear relationship between soil ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid (EDTA) extractable Cu and yield response to added Cu. There was little difference between the forms of Cu tested on yield, or between the wetter or the adjuvant. Cu sprays did not affect beet processing quality, even when large yield responses were obtained. An analysis of the geographical distribution of sugar beet quota and soil extractable Cu showed that 15% of the UK's national crop could be affected by Cu deficiency.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Copper sprays did not affect sugar beet yields on peat soils.
- Taxon
- beet
Beta vulgarise0 - Treatment
- Cu sprayse0
- Outcome
- beet yieldse0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
- Setting
- peat soilse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The Cu sprays did not affect beet yields for crops grown on the peat soils.”
Claim · model-written summary
Copper sprays increased sugar beet yield on two light textured mineral soils.
- Taxon
- BeetBeta vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Cu sprayse0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Qualifier
- twoe0
- Setting
- light textured mineral soilse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“On two of the light textured mineral soils the Cu sprays did increase yield”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil EDTA extractable copper showed no clear relationship with yield response to added copper.
- Taxon
- BeetBeta vulgarist0
- Compound
- soil ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid (EDTA) extractable Cue0
- Outcome
- yield response to added Cue0
- Direction
- no clear relationshipe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was no clear relationship between soil ethylene diamine tetra acetic acid (EDTA) extractable Cu and yield response to added Cu”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Copper formulation had little effect on sugar beet yield.
- Taxon
- BeetBeta vulgarist0
- Treatment
- forms of Cue0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- little differencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was little difference between the forms of Cu tested on yield”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Wetter and adjuvant treatments had little difference in sugar beet yield.
Not reportedTaxonOutcomeDirection
Verbatim
e0“or between the wetter or the adjuvant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Copper sprays did not affect beet processing quality, including where yield responses were large.
- Taxon
- beetBeta vulgarise0
- Treatment
- Cu sprayse0
- Outcome
- beet processing qualitye0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
- Qualifier
- even when large yield responses were obtainede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cu sprays did not affect beet processing quality, even when large yield responses were obtained.”
Claim · model-written summary
An analysis estimated that copper deficiency could affect 15% of the UK sugar beet crop.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0 - Outcome
- national crop could be affected by Cu deficiencye0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Qualifier
- could be affectede0
- Setting
- UKe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“An analysis of the geographical distribution of sugar beet quota and soil extractable Cu showed that 15% of the UK's national crop could be affected by Cu deficiency.”
The same questions in other papers
copper atom · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
copper atom · quality: general · Beta vulgaris (beet)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
application · quality: general · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →application · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
111 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
116 papers more in this group
See all 120 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.