Abstract
These studies are aimed at studying the effect of such preparations as Biogenic iron, Silicon, humic preparation Rostok applied during vegetation in the tillering phase against the background of chemical protection on plant development and yield of spring wheat in the conditions of forest-steppe of the Northern Trans-Urals. In the process of experiments phytosanitary load of seeds with the content of infectious beginning 20-30%, damage of plant roots by fusarium-helminthosporiosis infection in the soil with the spread of the disease 8%, disease development up to 3% were taken into account. The excess of biometric indices in tillering phase was observed in the variant of chemical fungicide application on seeds, where leaf development exceeded other variants by 0.8 cm. Flag leaf development with exceeding the variants by 3-4 cm was observed with application of Biogenic Iron (BioFeCo) in pure form and in mixture with humic preparation Rostok. Biometrics conducted in the phase of filling - milk ripeness determined the effect of variants with humic preparations and their mixtures with Biogenic iron (BioFeCo), silicon (SiO 2 ) on the increase in stem weight by 3-6 g, leaf weight by 1.0-1.7 g, ear weight by 1.0 g. Yield under the conditions of the year was 4.4-4.7 t/ha, no reliable increase in yield was not provided by any variant, but some exceeded the control in the variants biogenic iron (BioFeSo), Biogenic iron mixed with sprout (0.13 t/ha). The results of structural analysis show an increase in the values of the variants of application of Biogenic Iron (BioFeCo) in pure form and in mixture with humic preparation Rostock, so the number of spikelets 11-13.4 pcs, spike length 7.2-8.3 cm, number of grains in the spikelet 23-31 pcs, grain weight from 25 stems 27-37 g, weight of 1000 grains 34-42 g and biological yield 4.7-7.7 t/ha. Grain quality indicators did not have significant changes in the variants and the grain had a high gluten content. The studies show a positive effect on the development of spring wheat plants during the growing season with moisture deficit and excessive temperatures of the studied preparations Biogenic iron (BioFeSo), humic preparation Rostock.
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 19
Claim · model-written summary
Seed fungicide increased tillering leaf development by 0.8 cm over other variants.
- Taxon
- spring wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Organ / stage
- tillering phasee0
- Treatment
- chemical fungicide application on seedse0
- Outcome
- leaf developmente0
- Direction
- exceedede0
- Value
- 0.8 cme0
- Comparator
- other variantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The excess of biometric indices in tillering phase was observed in the variant of chemical fungicide application on seeds, where leaf development exceeded other variants by 0.8 cm”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron alone increased flag leaf development by 3-4 cm over variants.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Biogenic Iron (BioFeCo) in pure forme0
- Outcome
- Flag leaf developmente0
- Direction
- exceedinge0
- Value
- 3-4 cme0
- Comparator
- the variantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flag leaf development with exceeding the variants by 3-4 cm was observed with application of Biogenic Iron (BioFeCo) in pure form and in mixture with humic preparation Rostok”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron mixed with Rostok increased flag leaf development by 3-4 cm.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- mixture with humic preparation Rostoke0
- Outcome
- Flag leaf developmente0
- Direction
- exceedinge0
- Value
- 3-4 cme0
- Comparator
- the variantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Flag leaf development with exceeding the variants by 3-4 cm was observed with application of Biogenic Iron (BioFeCo) in pure form and in mixture with humic preparation Rostok”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Humic preparation variants and mixtures raised stem weight by 3-6 g.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- humic preparations and their mixtures with Biogenic iron (BioFeCo), silicon (SiO 2 )e0
- Outcome
- stem weighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 3-6 ge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“variants with humic preparations and their mixtures with Biogenic iron (BioFeCo), silicon (SiO 2 ) on the increase in stem weight by 3-6 g, leaf weight by 1.0-1.7 g, ear weight by 1.0 g”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Humic preparation variants and mixtures raised leaf weight by 1.0-1.7 g.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- humic preparations and their mixtures with Biogenic iron (BioFeCo), silicon (SiO 2 )e0
- Outcome
- leaf weighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 1.0-1.7 ge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“variants with humic preparations and their mixtures with Biogenic iron (BioFeCo), silicon (SiO 2 ) on the increase in stem weight by 3-6 g, leaf weight by 1.0-1.7 g, ear weight by 1.0 g”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Humic preparation variants and mixtures raised ear weight by 1.0 g.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- humic preparations and their mixtures with Biogenic iron (BioFeCo), silicon (SiO 2 )e0
- Outcome
- ear weighte0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 1.0 ge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“variants with humic preparations and their mixtures with Biogenic iron (BioFeCo), silicon (SiO 2 ) on the increase in stem weight by 3-6 g, leaf weight by 1.0-1.7 g, ear weight by 1.0 g”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Wheat yield was 4.4-4.7 t/ha.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Value
- 4.4-4.7 t/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield under the conditions of the year was 4.4-4.7 t/ha”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
No treatment variant reliably increased yield.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- any variante0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no reliable increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no reliable increase in yield was not provided by any variant”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron exceeded control yield by 0.13 t/ha.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- biogenic iron (BioFeSo)e0
- Outcome
- controle0
- Direction
- exceedede0
- Value
- 0.13 t/hae0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“some exceeded the control in the variants biogenic iron (BioFeSo), Biogenic iron mixed with sprout (0.13 t/ha)”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron mixed with sprout exceeded control yield by 0.13 t/ha.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Biogenic iron mixed with sproute0
- Outcome
- controle0
- Direction
- exceedede0
- Value
- 0.13 t/hae0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“some exceeded the control in the variants biogenic iron (BioFeSo), Biogenic iron mixed with sprout (0.13 t/ha)”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron alone and mixed with Rostock increased spikelet number to 11-13.4.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Biogenic Iron (BioFeCo) in pure form and in mixture with humic preparation Rostocke0
- Outcome
- number of spikeletse0
- Direction
- increasee1
- Value
- 11-13.4 pcse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“application of Biogenic Iron (BioFeCo) in pure form and in mixture with humic preparation Rostock, so the number of spikelets 11-13.4 pcs, spike length 7.2-8.3 cm, number of grains in the spikelet 23-31 pcs, grain weight from 25 stems 27-37 g, weight of 1000 grains 34-42 g and biological yield 4.7-7.7 t/ha”
e1“The results of structural analysis show an increase in the values”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron variants increased spike length to 7.2-8.3 cm.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- spike lengthe0
- Value
- 7.2-8.3 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“spike length 7.2-8.3 cm”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron variants produced 23-31 grains per spikelet.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- number of grains in the spikelete0
- Value
- 23-31 pcse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“number of grains in the spikelet 23-31 pcs”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron variants produced 27-37 g grain weight from 25 stems.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- grain weight from 25 stemse0
- Value
- 27-37 ge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“grain weight from 25 stems 27-37 g”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron variants produced 34-42 g per 1000 grains.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- weight of 1000 grainse0
- Value
- 34-42 ge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“weight of 1000 grains 34-42 g”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron variants produced biological yield of 4.7-7.7 t/ha.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- biological yielde0
- Value
- 4.7-7.7 t/hae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“biological yield 4.7-7.7 t/ha”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain quality indicators showed no significant changes among variants.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- variantse0
- Outcome
- Grain quality indicatorse0
- Direction
- did not have significant changese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Grain quality indicators did not have significant changes in the variants”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Grain had high gluten content.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Outcome
- gluten contente0
- Direction
- highe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the grain had a high gluten content”
t0“spring wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Biogenic iron and Rostock benefited spring wheat development during moisture deficit and high temperatures.
- Taxon
- spring wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Biogenic iron (BioFeSo), humic preparation Rostocke0
- Outcome
- development of spring wheat plantse0
- Direction
- positive effecte0
- Qualifier
- moisture deficit and excessive temperaturese0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“positive effect on the development of spring wheat plants during the growing season with moisture deficit and excessive temperatures of the studied preparations Biogenic iron (BioFeSo), humic preparation Rostock”
The same questions in other papers
silicon dioxide · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 papers →iron atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
40 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
50 papers more in this group
See all 54 papers →silicon atom · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
73 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
77 papers more in this group
See all 81 papers →silicon atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
84 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
86 papers more in this group
See all 90 papers →iron atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
91 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
95 papers more in this group
See all 99 papers →iron atom · control · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
silicon dioxide · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →fungicide · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
41 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
49 papers more in this group
See all 53 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.