Paper · 2024 · Russian Agricultural Sciences

Evaluation of the Efficacy of the Use of Humic Fertilizers in the Cultivation of Spring Barley in the Soil and Climatic Conditions of the Central Chernozem Region

V. I. Lazarev; Zh. N. Minchenko

12
claims
19
verbatim quotes
0
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract The effect of humic fertilizers of domestic (ECO-SP) and foreign (Fulvigrain Classic, Gumiful Pro) production on the yield and quality of spring barley grain of the Prometheus variety was studied. The cultivation was performed as follows. Without treatment with humic fertilizers (control); ECO-SP: seed treatment (0.5 L/t) + treatment of plants in the tillering phase (0.5 L/ha) + treatment of plants in the stem elongation phase (0.5 L/ha); Fulvigrain Classic: seed treatment (0.8 L/t) + treatment of plants in the tillering phase (0.4 L/ha) + treatment of plants in the stem elongation phase (0.4 L/ha); Humiful Pro: seed treatment (0.1 L/t) + processing of plants in the tillering phase (0.1 L/ha) + processing of plants in the stem elongation phase (0.1 L/ha). The work was carried out in 2020–2022 in the Kursk Federal Agrarian Scientific Center (Kursk oblast, Kursk district, Cheryomushki village). The soil of the experimental site is a typical powerful, heavy-loamy chernozem. The treatment of spring barley seeds with humic fertilizers was found to increase their germination energy by 2–7%, and laboratory germination by 3–5% if compared with the seeds untreated with humic fertilizers. When processing seeds and plants with humic fertilizers, the yield of spring barley increased by 0.46–0.56 t/ha or by 12.7–15.5%, the grain size, by 0.7–1.6%, the protein content, by 0.2–0.4%, and the starch, by 0.4–0.9%. Higher yields of spring barley were provided by ECO-SP and Fulvigrain Classic humic fertilizers, 0.52.and 0.56 t/ha respectively. The efficacy of Humiful Pro humic fertilizer was lower: the yield increase was 0.46 t/ha or 12.7%, the grain size increased by 0.7%, the protein content, by 0.6%, and the starch, by 0.3% if compared with the control.

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic fertilizers increased barley seed germination energy by 2–7%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaree0
Treatment
humic fertilizerse0
Outcome
germination energye0
Direction
increasee0
Value
2–7%e0
Comparator
seeds untreated with humic fertilizerse0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The treatment of spring barley seeds with humic fertilizers was found to increase their germination energy by 2–7%, and laboratory germination by 3–5% if compared with the seeds untreated with humic fertilizers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 995–1206 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic fertilizers increased laboratory germination by 3–5%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaree0
Treatment
humic fertilizerse0
Outcome
laboratory germinatione0
Direction
increasee0
Value
3–5%e0
Comparator
seeds untreated with humic fertilizerse0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The treatment of spring barley seeds with humic fertilizers was found to increase their germination energy by 2–7%, and laboratory germination by 3–5% if compared with the seeds untreated with humic fertilizers.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 995–1206 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic fertilizers increased yield by 0.46–0.56 t/ha.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaree0
Treatment
humic fertilizerse0
Outcome
yield of spring barleye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.46–0.56 t/hae0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“When processing seeds and plants with humic fertilizers, the yield of spring barley increased by 0.46–0.56 t/ha or by 12.7–15.5%, the grain size, by 0.7–1.6%, the protein content, by 0.2–0.4%, and the starch, by 0.4–0.9%.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1207–1428 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic fertilizers increased grain size by 0.7–1.6%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
humic fertilizerst0
Outcome
grain sizee0
Value
0.7–1.6%e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the grain size, by 0.7–1.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1337–1364 · show in text ↑
t0

“Humic Fertilizers in the Cultivation of Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 41–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic fertilizers increased protein content by 0.2–0.4%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
humic fertilizerst0
Outcome
protein contente0
Value
0.2–0.4%e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the protein content, by 0.2–0.4%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1366–1398 · show in text ↑
t0

“Humic Fertilizers in the Cultivation of Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 41–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humic fertilizers increased starch content by 0.4–0.9%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
humic fertilizerst0
Outcome
starche0
Value
0.4–0.9%e0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the starch, by 0.4–0.9%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1404–1427 · show in text ↑
t0

“Humic Fertilizers in the Cultivation of Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 41–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ECO-SP increased yield by 0.52 t/ha.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaree0
Treatment
ECO-SPe0
Outcome
yields of spring barleye0
Direction
Highere0
Value
0.52e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Higher yields of spring barley were provided by ECO-SP and Fulvigrain Classic humic fertilizers, 0.52.and 0.56 t/ha respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1429–1558 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fulvigrain Classic increased yield by 0.56 t/ha.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaree0
Treatment
Fulvigrain Classice0
Outcome
yields of spring barleye0
Direction
Highere0
Value
0.56 t/hae0

Not reportedComparator

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Higher yields of spring barley were provided by ECO-SP and Fulvigrain Classic humic fertilizers, 0.52.and 0.56 t/ha respectively.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1429–1558 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humiful Pro increased yield by 0.46 t/ha relative to control.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
Humiful Proe0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasee0
Value
0.46 t/hae0
Comparator
controle0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The efficacy of Humiful Pro humic fertilizer was lower: the yield increase was 0.46 t/ha or 12.7%, the grain size increased by 0.7%, the protein content, by 0.6%, and the starch, by 0.3% if compared with the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1559–1775 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humiful Pro increased grain size by 0.7%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
Humiful Proe0
Outcome
grain sizee0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.7%e0
Comparator
controle0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The efficacy of Humiful Pro humic fertilizer was lower: the yield increase was 0.46 t/ha or 12.7%, the grain size increased by 0.7%, the protein content, by 0.6%, and the starch, by 0.3% if compared with the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1559–1775 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humiful Pro increased protein content by 0.6%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
Humiful Proe0
Outcome
protein contente0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.6%e0
Comparator
controle0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The efficacy of Humiful Pro humic fertilizer was lower: the yield increase was 0.46 t/ha or 12.7%, the grain size increased by 0.7%, the protein content, by 0.6%, and the starch, by 0.3% if compared with the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1559–1775 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–94 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Humiful Pro increased starch by 0.3%.

Taxon
spring barleyHordeum vulgaret0
Treatment
Humiful Proe0
Outcome
starche0
Direction
increasede0
Value
0.3%e0
Comparator
controle0

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

Hordeum vulgare
Hordeum vulgare · TaxonJackyM59 · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The efficacy of Humiful Pro humic fertilizer was lower: the yield increase was 0.46 t/ha or 12.7%, the grain size increased by 0.7%, the protein content, by 0.6%, and the starch, by 0.3% if compared with the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1559–1775 · show in text ↑
t0

“Spring Barley”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 81–94 · show in text ↑

other · quality: sugar starch · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 2 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

other · quality: protein · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

fertilization · quality: sugar starch · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

7 papers: 5 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

3 papers more in this group

See all 7 papers →

other · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

26 papers: 24 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 papers →

other · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

31 papers: 28 positive, 3 negative or no effect

27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

27 papers more in this group

See all 31 papers →

fertilization · quality: protein · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

79 papers: 64 positive, 15 negative or no effect

63 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 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 →

fertilization · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

165 papers: 138 positive, 27 negative or no effect

137 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

161 papers more in this group

See all 165 papers →

fertilization · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results

550 papers: 473 positive, 77 negative or no effect

472 papers in the same direction as this paper · 66 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

546 papers more in this group

See all 550 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.