Abstract
Fulvic acid is a widely recognized biostimulant due to its benefits in traditional crops; however, its application in hydroponic systems, particularly in microgreen production, is not well documented. This study evaluated the effect of fulvic acid on the growth of hydroponic pea microgreens (Pisum sativum L.). The experimental design was completely randomized and consisted of four treatments (n=5): nutrient solution (NS), fulvic acid solution 0.01 % (FA), NS + FA, and water (control). After 12 days, growth and biochemical parameters were measured. The results showed that NS and NS+FA treatments significantly increased stem length (7.73 cm and 7.28 cm), fresh weight (0.613 g and 0.618 g), and yield (6.15 kg.m-2) compared to the FA treatment or control. The FA treatment increased stem diameter (2.38 mm) but did not significantly increase biomass. Biochemical analysis showed that FA and control had higher nitrate content, while NS and NS+FA reduced nitrate accumulation. Antioxidant capacity, chlorophyll content, and color index were similar among treatments. However, the pH increased with the application of fulvic acid. Fulvic acid alone moderately improved growth but was less effective than the nutrient solution. The combination of fulvic acid with a complete nutrient solution did not produce additive effects, highlighting the importance of balanced nutrition in hydroponic microgreen production.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution significantly increased stem length to 7.73 cm versus fulvic acid or water.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.
Lathyrus oleraceust0 - Treatment
- NSe0
- Outcome
- stem lengthe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 7.73 cme0
- Comparator
- FA treatment or controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NS and NS+FA treatments significantly increased stem length (7.73 cm and 7.28 cm), fresh weight (0.613 g and 0.618 g), and yield (6.15 kg.m-2) compared to the FA treatment or control”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution plus fulvic acid significantly increased stem length to 7.28 cm.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- NS+FAe0
- Outcome
- stem lengthe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 7.28 cme0
- Comparator
- FA treatment or controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NS and NS+FA treatments significantly increased stem length (7.73 cm and 7.28 cm), fresh weight (0.613 g and 0.618 g), and yield (6.15 kg.m-2) compared to the FA treatment or control”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution significantly increased fresh weight to 0.613 g.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- NSe0
- Outcome
- fresh weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 0.613 ge0
- Comparator
- FA treatment or controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NS and NS+FA treatments significantly increased stem length (7.73 cm and 7.28 cm), fresh weight (0.613 g and 0.618 g), and yield (6.15 kg.m-2) compared to the FA treatment or control”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution plus fulvic acid significantly increased fresh weight to 0.618 g.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- NS+FAe0
- Outcome
- fresh weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 0.618 ge0
- Comparator
- FA treatment or controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NS and NS+FA treatments significantly increased stem length (7.73 cm and 7.28 cm), fresh weight (0.613 g and 0.618 g), and yield (6.15 kg.m-2) compared to the FA treatment or control”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution increased yield to 6.15 kg.m-2.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- NSe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 6.15 kg.m-2e0
- Comparator
- FA treatment or controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NS and NS+FA treatments significantly increased stem length (7.73 cm and 7.28 cm), fresh weight (0.613 g and 0.618 g), and yield (6.15 kg.m-2) compared to the FA treatment or control”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution plus fulvic acid increased yield to 6.15 kg.m-2.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- NS+FAe0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 6.15 kg.m-2e0
- Comparator
- FA treatment or controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“NS and NS+FA treatments significantly increased stem length (7.73 cm and 7.28 cm), fresh weight (0.613 g and 0.618 g), and yield (6.15 kg.m-2) compared to the FA treatment or control”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fulvic acid increased stem diameter to 2.38 mm.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- FA treatmente0
- Outcome
- stem diametere0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 2.38 mme0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The FA treatment increased stem diameter (2.38 mm) but did not significantly increase biomass”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fulvic acid did not significantly increase biomass.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- FA treatmente0
- Outcome
- biomasse0
- Direction
- did not significantly increasee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The FA treatment increased stem diameter (2.38 mm) but did not significantly increase biomass”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fulvic acid yielded higher nitrate content.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- FAe0
- Outcome
- nitrate contente0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- NSe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biochemical analysis showed that FA and control had higher nitrate content, while NS and NS+FA reduced nitrate accumulation”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The water control had higher nitrate content.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- controle0
- Outcome
- nitrate contente0
- Direction
- highere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biochemical analysis showed that FA and control had higher nitrate content, while NS and NS+FA reduced nitrate accumulation”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution reduced nitrate accumulation.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- NSe0
- Outcome
- nitrate accumulatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- FAe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biochemical analysis showed that FA and control had higher nitrate content, while NS and NS+FA reduced nitrate accumulation”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Nutrient solution plus fulvic acid reduced nitrate accumulation.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- NS+FAe0
- Outcome
- nitrate accumulatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- FAe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biochemical analysis showed that FA and control had higher nitrate content, while NS and NS+FA reduced nitrate accumulation”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Antioxidant capacity, chlorophyll content and color index were similar across treatments.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Outcome
- Antioxidant capacity, chlorophyll content, and color indexe0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Antioxidant capacity, chlorophyll content, and color index were similar among treatments”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fulvic acid increased pH.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- application of fulvic acide0
- Outcome
- pHe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the pH increased with the application of fulvic acid”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
Claim · model-written summary
Combining fulvic acid with nutrient solution had no additive effect.
- Taxon
- Pisum sativum L.Lathyrus oleraceust0
- Treatment
- combination of fulvic acid with a complete nutrient solutione0
- Outcome
- additive effectse0
- Direction
- did not producee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The combination of fulvic acid with a complete nutrient solution did not produce additive effects”
t0“Pisum sativum L.”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · nutrient: content · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
32 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
32 papers more in this group
See all 36 papers →fertilization · growth · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
85 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
93 papers more in this group
See all 97 papers →fertilization · yield · Lathyrus oleraceus (pea)Positive and negative results
215 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
236 papers more in this group
See all 240 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.