Abstract
Abstract Background and aims The aims are to determine to which extent different plant species increase nitrogen (N) acquisition in response to phosphorus (P) addition and P acquisition in response to N addition as well as to analyze resulting nutrient limitations. Methods The field experiment is replicated at ten sites in Sweden and comprises three fertilization regimes (low, medium, and high) each consisting of a control and a N, P, and NP treatment. Yields as well as N and P contents of the yields of four species (winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet) were analyzed over 60 years. Results The relative increase in yield P in response to N fertilization was larger than the relative increase in yield N in response to P fertilization for three species. Synergistic NP co-limitation was observed for all species at some sites. The synergistic growth effect in response to NP addition occurred at more sites at high than at low fertilization. At one nutrient-poor site, all species in all fertilization regimes were (synergistically) NP co-limited. Sugar beet was (synergistically) NP co-limited at all sites in all fertilization regimes. Conclusion Species differed in nutrient acquisition, but most species used added N more effectively to acquire P than they used added P to acquire N. Synergistic NP co-limitation was observed for all plant species at some sites, and it increased with fertilization rate, which is likely due to the limits to which plants can use N to acquire P and P to acquire N.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
For three species, nitrogen fertilization caused a larger relative increase in yield phosphorus than phosphorus fertilization caused in yield nitrogen.
- Taxon
- winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgaris.jpg?width=60)
Hordeum vulgare
Triticum aestivum
Avena sativae1 - Treatment
- N fertilizatione0
- Outcome
- yield Pe0
- Direction
- largere0
- Qualifier
- for three speciese0
- Comparator
- P fertilizatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The relative increase in yield P in response to N fertilization was larger than the relative increase in yield N in response to P fertilization for three species.”
e1“four species (winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet)”
Claim · model-written summary
All four species showed synergistic NP colimitation at some sites.
- Taxon
- winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarisHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumAvena sativae1
- Outcome
- Synergistic NP co-limitatione0
- Qualifier
- at some sitese0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Synergistic NP co-limitation was observed for all species at some sites.”
e1“four species (winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet)”
Claim · model-written summary
Synergistic growth effects from NP addition occurred at more sites under high than low fertilization.
- Taxon
- winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarisHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumAvena sativae1
- Treatment
- NP additione0
- Outcome
- synergistic growth effecte0
- Direction
- moree0
- Qualifier
- highe0
- Comparator
- low fertilizatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The synergistic growth effect in response to NP addition occurred at more sites at high than at low fertilization.”
e1“four species (winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet)”
Claim · model-written summary
At one nutrient-poor site, all species were NP colimited in every fertilization regime.
- Taxon
- winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarisHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumAvena sativae1
- Outcome
- NP co-limitede0
- Setting
- one nutrient-poor sitee0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At one nutrient-poor site, all species in all fertilization regimes were (synergistically) NP co-limited.”
e1“four species (winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet)”
Claim · model-written summary
Sugar beet was NP colimited across all sites and fertilization regimes.
- Taxon
- Sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Outcome
- NP co-limitede0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sugar beet was (synergistically) NP co-limited at all sites in all fertilization regimes.”
Claim · model-written summary
Species differed in nutrient acquisition.
- Taxon
- winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarisHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumAvena sativae1
- Outcome
- nutrient acquisitione0
- Direction
- differede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Species differed in nutrient acquisition”
e1“four species (winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet)”
Claim · model-written summary
NP colimitation increased with fertilization rate.
- Taxon
- winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarisHordeum vulgareTriticum aestivumAvena sativae1
- Treatment
- fertilization ratee0
- Outcome
- NP co-limitatione0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Synergistic NP co-limitation was observed for all plant species at some sites, and it increased with fertilization rate”
e1“four species (winter wheat, spring barley, oat, and sugar beet)”
The same questions in other papers
nanoparticle · growth · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →nanoparticle · growth · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →nanoparticle · growth · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
31 papers more in this group
See all 35 papers →fertilization · yield · Avena sativa (oats)Positive and negative results
142 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
156 papers more in this group
See all 160 papers →nanoparticle · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
145 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
164 papers more in this group
See all 168 papers →fertilization · yield · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
236 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
263 papers more in this group
See all 267 papers →fertilization · yield · Hordeum vulgare (barley)Positive and negative results
472 papers in the same direction as this paper · 66 in the opposite direction · 11 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
546 papers more in this group
See all 550 papers →fertilization · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
3,114 papers in the same direction as this paper · 284 in the opposite direction · 39 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- 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.