Paper · 2024 · Commagene Journal of Biology

Effects of Biochar and Cladophora glomerata on Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) Growth and Rhizosphere Enzyme Activities

Göksal Sezen; Çiğdem Küçük

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-sa

Abstract

The positive effects of biochar on both soil quality and plant growth and also on plant growth of macroalgae have been reported in studies. Studies on biochar and macroalgae interaction are quite limited. This study was carried out according to randomized plot design in greenhouse conditions to determine the effects of biochar and Cladophora glomerata applications and interaction on the growth of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) and some enzyme activities in the rhizosphere. Biochar and C. glomerata interaction increased wheat root (90%) and shoot dry weight (84.2%), root length (43.1%) and plant height (84.2%) compared to control. Biochar application increased alkaline phosphatase activity by 66.3%, while C. glomerata increased β-glucosidase activity by 49%. The interaction of both applications increased catalase activity by 62.1% compared to control. These findings confirm the potential of biochar and C. glomerata to improve wheat production by inducing growth.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined biochar and Cladophora raised wheat root dry weight by 90%.

Treatment
Biochar and C. glomerata interactione0
Outcome
roote0
Direction
increasede0
Value
90%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Biochar and C. glomerata interaction increased wheat root (90%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 476–539 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 47–52 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined applications raised shoot dry weight by 84.2%.

Outcome
shoot dry weighte0
Value
84.2%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“shoot dry weight (84.2%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–568 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 47–52 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined applications raised root length by 43.1%.

Outcome
root lengthe0
Value
43.1%e0

Not reportedTreatmentComparatorDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“root length (43.1%)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 570–589 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 47–52 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined applications raised plant height by 84.2%.

Outcome
plant heighte0
Value
84.2%e0
Comparator
controle0

Not reportedTreatmentDirection

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“plant height (84.2%) compared to control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 594–634 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 47–52 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biochar raised alkaline phosphatase activity by 66.3%.

Treatment
Biochar applicatione0
Outcome
alkaline phosphatase activitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
66.3%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Biochar application increased alkaline phosphatase activity by 66.3%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 636–704 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 47–52 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cladophora raised beta-glucosidase activity by 49%.

Treatment
C. glomeratae0
Outcome
β-glucosidase activitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
49%e0

Not reportedComparator

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“C. glomerata increased β-glucosidase activity by 49%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 712–764 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 47–52 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined applications raised catalase activity by 62.1% versus control.

Treatment
both applicationse0
Outcome
catalase activitye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
62.1%e0
Comparator
controle0

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

Triticum aestivum
Triticum aestivum · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“interaction of both applications increased catalase activity by 62.1% compared to control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 770–859 · show in text ↑
t0

“wheat”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 47–52 · show in text ↑

biochar · soil: biology · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

17 papers: 14 positive, 3 negative or no effect

13 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

13 papers more in this group

See all 17 papers →

biochar · growth · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results

85 papers: 80 positive, 5 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. no effect

81 papers more in this group

See all 85 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.