Paper · 2023 · Crop and Pasture Science

Effects of soil and foliar applications of iron with or without nitrogen on production and nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)

Maria J. Poblaciones; Carlos García-Latorre; Manuel Martinez; et al.

7
claims
17
verbatim quotes
3
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Context Iron (Fe) is an essential nutrient; however, it is deficient in the diets of millions of people globally, resulting in anaemia. Agronomic biofortification has been shown to be effective in alleviating Fe deficiency. Aims We evaluated the efficacy of soil and foliar applications of Fe with or without nitrogen (N) on floret and plant yield, and nutritional properties of broccoli (cv. Parthenon), in order to assess biofortification potential. Methods A greenhouse experiment comprised seven treatments: (1) control, no Fe or N application; (2) soil application of Fe (10 mg FeSO4.7H2O/kg before transplanting); (3) soil application of Fe + foliar application of N (0.4% (w/v) calcium ammonium nitrate at floret emergence); (4) foliar application of Fe (0.5% (w/v) FeSO4.7H2O at floret emergence); (5) foliar applications of Fe and N; (6) soil + foliar applications of Fe; (7) soil application of Fe + foliar applications of Fe and N. Key results Foliar Fe application with N and/or with soil Fe significantly increased commercial floret weight relative to the control (>62.5 vs 46 g), whereas treatments without foliar Fe (i.e. soil Fe alone or with N) did not differ from the control. Similarly, treatments with foliar Fe generally significantly increased floret diameter, whereas those without foliar Fe did not. Treatments with foliar Fe significantly increased floret Fe concentration (>10-fold), resulting in highly available Fe, with phytic acid:Fe molar ratios <0.2, and higher antioxidant activity and polyphenol content. Conclusions Foliar application of Fe, especially in combination with N, is the most efficient and effective application method, not only for biofortification purposes but also for productivity and for enhancing bioactive compounds in broccoli. Implications This study opens the door to implementation of effective and economically viable Fe biofortification programs with broccoli and other crops.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar Fe application with N and/or soil Fe significantly increased commercial floret weight of broccoli relative to the control.

Treatment
Foliar Fe application with N and/or with soil Fee1
Outcome
commercial floret weighte1
Direction
significantly increasede1
Value
>62.5 vs 46 ge1
Comparator
controle1
Setting
greenhousee2

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

Brassica oleracea var. italica
Brassica oleracea var. italica · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–155 · show in text ↑
e1

“Foliar Fe application with N and/or with soil Fe significantly increased commercial floret weight relative to the control (>62.5 vs 46 g)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 955–1092 · show in text ↑
e2

“A greenhouse experiment comprised seven treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 460–510 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Broccoli treatments without foliar Fe did not differ from the control in commercial floret weight.

Treatment
treatments without foliar Fe (i.e. soil Fe alone or with N)e1
Outcome
commercial floret weighte2
Direction
did not differe1
Comparator
controle1

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

Brassica oleracea var. italica
Brassica oleracea var. italica · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–155 · show in text ↑
e1

“treatments without foliar Fe (i.e. soil Fe alone or with N) did not differ from the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1102–1193 · show in text ↑
e2

“Foliar Fe application with N and/or with soil Fe significantly increased commercial floret weight relative to the control (>62.5 vs 46 g)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 955–1092 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatments with foliar Fe generally significantly increased floret diameter of broccoli, unlike those without foliar Fe.

Treatment
treatments with foliar Fee1
Outcome
floret diametere1
Direction
significantly increasede1
Qualifier
generallye1
Comparator
those without foliar Fee1

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

Brassica oleracea var. italica
Brassica oleracea var. italica · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–155 · show in text ↑
e1

“treatments with foliar Fe generally significantly increased floret diameter, whereas those without foliar Fe did not”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1206–1322 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatments with foliar Fe significantly increased floret Fe concentration more than 10-fold.

Treatment
Treatments with foliar Fee1
Outcome
floret Fe concentratione1
Direction
significantly increasede1
Value
>10-folde1

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. italica
Brassica oleracea var. italica · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–155 · show in text ↑
e1

“Treatments with foliar Fe significantly increased floret Fe concentration (>10-fold)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1324–1408 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Broccoli florets from foliar Fe treatments had phytic acid:Fe molar ratios below 0.2.

Outcome
phytic acid:Fe molar ratiose1
Value
<0.2e1

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

Brassica oleracea var. italica
Brassica oleracea var. italica · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–155 · show in text ↑
e1

“resulting in highly available Fe, with phytic acid:Fe molar ratios <0.2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1410–1481 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Treatments with foliar Fe increased antioxidant activity and polyphenol content of broccoli florets.

Treatment
Treatments with foliar Fee1
Outcome
antioxidant activity and polyphenol contente2
Direction
highere2

Not reportedComparator

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

Brassica oleracea var. italica
Brassica oleracea var. italica · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–155 · show in text ↑
e1

“Treatments with foliar Fe significantly increased floret Fe concentration (>10-fold)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1324–1408 · show in text ↑
e2

“higher antioxidant activity and polyphenol content”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1487–1537 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar Fe application, especially with N, is the most efficient and effective application method for broccoli biofortification and productivity.

Outcome
most efficient and effective application methode1
Qualifier
especially in combination with Ne1

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

Brassica oleracea var. italica
Brassica oleracea var. italica · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“nutritional quality of broccoli (Brassica oleracea var. italica)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 91–155 · show in text ↑
e1

“Foliar application of Fe, especially in combination with N, is the most efficient and effective application method, not only for biofortification purposes but also for productivity and for enhancing bioactive compounds in broccoli”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1551–1781 · show in text ↑

iron atom · nutrient: content · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results differ

7 papers: 6 positive, 1 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

iron atom · quality: phytochemicals · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)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 →

iron atom · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree

9 papers: 9 positive, 0 negative or no effect

8 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

application · nutrient: content · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

38 papers: 36 positive, 2 negative or no effect

35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

34 papers more in this group

See all 38 papers →

application · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results

79 papers: 74 positive, 5 negative or no effect

73 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

75 papers more in this group

See all 79 papers →

application · quality: phytochemicals · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree

18 papers: 18 positive, 0 negative or no effect

17 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 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.