Paper · 2023 · Agronomy

The Effect of Foliar Zinc Application on the Leaf Chlorophyll Concentrations and Grain Yields of the Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) in the Field Experiments of Two Seasons

Katalin Irmes; István Kristó; Lajos Szentpéteri; et al.

17
claims
32
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

This research examined the effectiveness of zinc foliar fertilizers. Two winter wheat varieties, GK Pilis and Zvezdana, were tested in a Zn-limited meadow chernozem soil. Crop yields and chlorophyll concentrations of the leaves were examined in the growing seasons of 2020/2021 of favorable weather conditions and 2021/2022 of drought weather conditions. In the experiment, three treatments were carried out with monozinc foliar fertilizer of a concentrated 12% (w/v) zinc sulfate heptahydrate solution, and the fourth plot was designed as the untreated control. The first monozinc treatment was applied at a dose of 1 L ha−1 and the second monozinc treatment at a dose of 2 L ha−1. These treatments were applied at tillering (BBCH 21–22). The third monozinc treatment was applied at a dose of 1 L ha−1 at tillering and flag leaf emergence (BBCH 21–22, BBCH 37). Samples were taken several times in the vegetation period, and measurements were made using different methods (SPAD, determination of total chlorophyll concentration from acetone solution) before and after Zn treatments. In 2020/2021 of favorable weather conditions, the yield of Zvezdana was 5.47 t ha−1 and that of Gk Pilis was 6.11 t ha−1, compared to 2021/2022 of drought weather conditions, in which year the yield of Zvezdana was 3.14 t ha−1 and that of Gk Pilis was 2.79 t ha−1. Yields of both varieties increased with increasing NPK nutrient doses. In 2021/2022, even at nutrient level D (NPK basal fertilizer and two-times N topdressing), we harvested on average twice as much as in 2020/2021 at nutrient level A (N basal fertilizer and once N topdressing). No significant effects were found between the foliar fertilizers in 2020/2021. In 2021/2022, Zn treatments, mainly at four nutrient levels tended to increase the yields of both varieties. The first treatment resulted in a grain yield reduction of 3% for GK Pilis, and the second treatment resulted in a grain yield reduction of 1.2% for Zvezdana. After the second and third treatments, grain yield reductions were 0.1%–0.5%. Although there was no significant difference in terms of the main averages, foliar fertilizer was found to be effective in the second year. The relationship between chlorophyll and grain yield was found to depend on the year and variety. A weak correlation (r = 0.33, p < 0.05) was found between the total chlorophyll concentration in leaves for Zvezdana in 2021, and a medium correlation for GK Pilis (r = 0.67, p < 0.05). Concerning grain yield and chlorophyll concentration, a strong correlation (r = 0.81, p < 0.05) was found for Zvezdana in 2022, and a weak correlation (r = 0.44, p < 0.05) for GK Pilis. A strong correlation was found between the total leaf chlorophyll concentration and SPAD index in both years (r = 0.81, p < 0.05)

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 17

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zvezdana yielded 5.47 t ha−1 in 2020/2021.

Taxon
Zvezdanae0
Outcome
yielde0
Value
5.47 t ha−1e0

Not reportedSetting

Verbatim

e0

“the yield of Zvezdana was 5.47 t ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1130–1167 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GK Pilis yielded 6.11 t ha−1 in 2020/2021.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
Gk Pilise0
Outcome
that of Gk Pilise0
Value
6.11 t ha−1e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“that of Gk Pilis was 6.11 t ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1172–1204 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zvezdana yielded 3.14 t ha−1 in the drought season.

Taxon
Zvezdanae0
Outcome
yielde0
Value
3.14 t ha−1e0

Verbatim

e0

“the yield of Zvezdana was 3.14 t ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1273–1310 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GK Pilis yielded 2.79 t ha−1 in the drought season.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
Gk Pilise0
Outcome
that of Gk Pilise0
Value
2.79 t ha−1e0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“that of Gk Pilis was 2.79 t ha−1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1315–1347 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield of both varieties increased with increasing NPK doses.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment
increasing NPK nutrient dosese0
Outcome
Yieldse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yields of both varieties increased with increasing NPK nutrient doses”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1349–1418 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nutrient level D in 2021/2022 yielded on average twice nutrient level A in 2020/2021.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment
nutrient level De0
Outcome
harvestede0
Direction
twice as muche0
Value
twice as muche0
Comparator
nutrient level Ae0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2021/2022, even at nutrient level D (NPK basal fertilizer and two-times N topdressing), we harvested on average twice as much as in 2020/2021 at nutrient level A (N basal fertilizer and once N topdressing)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1420–1628 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar fertilizers had no significant differences in 2020/2021.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment
foliar fertilizerse0
Outcome
effectse0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“No significant effects were found between the foliar fertilizers in 2020/2021”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1630–1707 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zn treatments tended to increase both varieties’ yields in 2021/2022.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment
Zn treatmentse0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
increasee0
Qualifier
mainly at four nutrient levelse0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In 2021/2022, Zn treatments, mainly at four nutrient levels tended to increase the yields of both varieties”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1709–1816 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The first treatment reduced GK Pilis grain yield by 3%.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
GK Pilise0
Treatment
first treatmente0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
reductione0
Value
3%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The first treatment resulted in a grain yield reduction of 3% for GK Pilis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1818–1892 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The second treatment reduced Zvezdana grain yield by 1.2%.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
Zvezdanae0
Treatment
second treatmente0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
reductione0
Value
1.2%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the second treatment resulted in a grain yield reduction of 1.2% for Zvezdana”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1898–1975 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Second and third treatments reduced grain yield by 0.1%–0.5%.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Treatment
second and third treatmentse0
Outcome
grain yielde0
Direction
reductionse0
Value
0.1%–0.5%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“After the second and third treatments, grain yield reductions were 0.1%–0.5%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1977–2053 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The chlorophyll and yield relationship depended on year and variety.

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
varietye0
Outcome
relationship between chlorophyll and grain yielde0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The relationship between chlorophyll and grain yield was found to depend on the year and variety”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2195–2291 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zvezdana had a weak reported correlation in 2021 (r = 0.33).

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
Zvezdanae0
Outcome
total chlorophyll concentration in leavese0
Value
r = 0.33e0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A weak correlation (r = 0.33, p < 0.05) was found between the total chlorophyll concentration in leaves for Zvezdana in 2021”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2293–2417 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

GK Pilis had a medium reported correlation (r = 0.67).

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
GK Pilise0
Outcome
medium correlatione0
Value
r = 0.67e0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a medium correlation for GK Pilis (r = 0.67, p < 0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2423–2477 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Zvezdana grain yield and chlorophyll concentration were strongly correlated in 2022 (r = 0.81).

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
Zvezdanae0
Outcome
grain yield and chlorophyll concentratione0
Value
r = 0.81e0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Concerning grain yield and chlorophyll concentration, a strong correlation (r = 0.81, p < 0.05) was found for Zvezdana in 2022”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2479–2605 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

GK Pilis grain yield and chlorophyll concentration were weakly correlated (r = 0.44).

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Material
GK Pilise0
Outcome
weak correlatione0
Value
r = 0.44e0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a weak correlation (r = 0.44, p < 0.05) for GK Pilis”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2611–2663 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Total leaf chlorophyll concentration and SPAD index were strongly correlated in both years (r = 0.81).

Taxon
Triticum aestivum L.Triticum aestivumt0
Organ / stage
leafe0
Outcome
total leaf chlorophyll concentration and SPAD indexe0
Value
r = 0.81e0

Not reportedDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A strong correlation was found between the total leaf chlorophyll concentration and SPAD index in both years (r = 0.81, p < 0.05)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2665–2794 · show in text ↑
t0

“Winter Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 101–136 · show in text ↑

zinc atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ

511 papers: 456 positive, 55 negative or no effect

455 papers in the same direction as this paper · 49 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. no effect

507 papers more in this group

See all 511 papers →

fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

3,438 papers: 3,115 positive, 323 negative or no effect

3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

3,434 papers more in this group

See all 3,438 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.