Paper · 2023 · Agronomy

Effects of Microbial Organic Fertilizer (MOF) Application on Desert Soil Enzyme Activity and Jujube Yield and Quality

Fanfan Shao; Wanghai Tao; Haokui Yan; et al.

10
claims
30
verbatim quotes
8
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Developing effective regulatory strategies to enhance irrigation water and fertilizer efficiency in the southern Xinjiang region of China, while simultaneously combatting desertification, is of paramount significance. This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang and presents findings from a two-year field experiment aimed at investigating the optimal application strategy of microbial organic fertilizer (MOF). The research aims to provide a scientific foundation for achieving high-quality jujube production. The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments. In 2021, these treatments included M1 (0.6 t/ha), M2 (1.2 t/ha), M3 (1.8 t/ha), and M4 (2.4 t/ha), while in 2022, they encompassed M1 (0.6 t/ha), M2 (1.2 t/ha), M4 (2.4 t/ha), and M5 (4.8 t/ha). Over the two-year trial period, we assessed various indices, including the soil’s physical properties, hydraulic characteristics, soil enzyme activities, and relative chlorophyll content. Additionally, we evaluated jujube yield, quality, and economic benefits. The results indicate that MOF application led to significant improvements in soil conditions. Specifically, the average moisture content and profile water storage of the 0–50 cm soil layer increased by 10.98% to 36.42% and 1.8% to 26.8%, respectively. Moreover, in both the 2021 and 2022 experiments, soil saturated water content (SSWC) and water-holding capacity (WHC) increased by 6.25% to 15.98%, while soil hydraulic conductivity (Ks) and bulk density (BD) decreased by 2.91% to 9.88% and 0.63% to 8.08%, respectively. In 2021, MOF application resulted in significant enhancements in soil enzyme activities, with urease activity increasing by approximately 22.5% to 100.5%, peroxidase activity rising by around 24.2% to 148.5%, and invertase activity augmenting by about 5.4% to 32.9%. Notably, the M4 treatment in 2021 demonstrated a substantial jujube yield increase of approximately 19.22%, elevating from 7.65 t/ha to 9.12 t/ha. Based on comprehensive analysis, this study recommends an optimal MOF application rate of approximately 2.4 t/ha. This approach not only provides robust support for the sustainable development of the jujube industry but also serves as a valuable reference for enhancing local soil resilience against desertification.

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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MOF application increased the average moisture content of the 0–50 cm soil layer by 10.98% to 36.42%.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF treatmentse2
Outcome
moisture contente3
Direction
increasede3
Value
10.98% to 36.42%e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“the average moisture content and profile water storage of the 0–50 cm soil layer increased by 10.98% to 36.42% and 1.8% to 26.8%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1211–1353 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MOF application increased profile water storage of the 0–50 cm soil layer by 1.8% to 26.8%.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF treatmentse2
Outcome
profile water storagee3
Direction
increasede3
Value
1.8% to 26.8%e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“the average moisture content and profile water storage of the 0–50 cm soil layer increased by 10.98% to 36.42% and 1.8% to 26.8%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1211–1353 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MOF application increased soil saturated water content and water-holding capacity by 6.25% to 15.98% in both years.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF treatmentse2
Outcome
soil saturated water content (SSWC) and water-holding capacity (WHC)e3
Direction
increasede3
Value
6.25% to 15.98%e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“soil saturated water content (SSWC) and water-holding capacity (WHC) increased by 6.25% to 15.98%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1404–1501 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MOF application decreased soil hydraulic conductivity (Ks) by 2.91% to 9.88%.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF treatmentse2
Outcome
soil hydraulic conductivity (Ks)e3
Direction
decreasede3
Value
2.91% to 9.88%e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“soil hydraulic conductivity (Ks) and bulk density (BD) decreased by 2.91% to 9.88% and 0.63% to 8.08%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1509–1624 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

MOF application decreased soil bulk density (BD) by 0.63% to 8.08%.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF treatmentse2
Outcome
bulk density (BD)e3
Direction
decreasede3
Value
0.63% to 8.08%e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“soil hydraulic conductivity (Ks) and bulk density (BD) decreased by 2.91% to 9.88% and 0.63% to 8.08%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1509–1624 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In 2021, MOF application significantly increased urease activity by approximately 22.5% to 100.5%.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF applicatione3
Outcome
urease activitye3
Direction
increasinge3
Value
approximately 22.5% to 100.5%e3
Qualifier
In 2021e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“In 2021, MOF application resulted in significant enhancements in soil enzyme activities, with urease activity increasing by approximately 22.5% to 100.5%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1626–1779 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In 2021, MOF application significantly increased peroxidase activity by around 24.2% to 148.5%.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF applicatione3
Outcome
peroxidase activitye4
Direction
risinge4
Value
around 24.2% to 148.5%e4
Qualifier
In 2021e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“In 2021, MOF application resulted in significant enhancements in soil enzyme activities, with urease activity increasing by approximately 22.5% to 100.5%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1626–1779 · show in text ↑
e4

“peroxidase activity rising by around 24.2% to 148.5%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1781–1833 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

In 2021, MOF application significantly increased invertase activity by about 5.4% to 32.9%.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
MOF applicatione3
Outcome
invertase activitye5
Direction
augmentinge5
Value
about 5.4% to 32.9%e5
Qualifier
In 2021e3
Comparator
control groupe2
Setting
Xinjiange1

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“The experiment involved a control group (utilizing only freshwater, referred to as CK) and various combinations of MOF treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 516–645 · show in text ↑
e3

“In 2021, MOF application resulted in significant enhancements in soil enzyme activities, with urease activity increasing by approximately 22.5% to 100.5%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1626–1779 · show in text ↑
e5

“invertase activity augmenting by about 5.4% to 32.9%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1839–1891 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The M4 MOF treatment in 2021 increased jujube yield by approximately 19.22%, from 7.65 t/ha to 9.12 t/ha.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Treatment
M4 treatmente2
Outcome
jujube yielde2
Direction
increasee2
Value
approximately 19.22%e2
Qualifier
elevating from 7.65 t/ha to 9.12 t/hae2
Setting
Xinjiange1

Not reportedComparator

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“the M4 treatment in 2021 demonstrated a substantial jujube yield increase of approximately 19.22%, elevating from 7.65 t/ha to 9.12 t/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1902–2038 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

An optimal MOF application rate of approximately 2.4 t/ha is recommended for jujube.

Taxon
Chinese jujubeZiziphus jujubae1
Outcome
optimal MOF application ratee2
Value
approximately 2.4 t/hae2

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

Ziziphus jujuba
Ziziphus jujuba · TaxonRémi Tournebize · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“This study focuses on Chinese jujube in Xinjiang”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 218–266 · show in text ↑
e2

“this study recommends an optimal MOF application rate of approximately 2.4 t/ha”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2073–2152 · show in text ↑

fertilization · soil: biology · Ziziphus jujuba (Chinese jujube)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

fertilization · quality: grain · Ziziphus jujuba (Chinese jujube)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 →

fertilization · physiology: antioxidant enzymes · Ziziphus jujuba (Chinese jujube)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 →

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.