Abstract
Enhancing the nutritional and technological quality of wheat is increasingly critical in the face of global micronutrient deficiencies. Traditional crop improvement has prioritized yield over nutritional value, resulting in staple crops with limited concentrations of essential nutrients and higher levels of antinutritional factors. Foliar fertilization strategies, particularly with micro- and macronutrients, such as selenium (Se) and sulphur (S), respectively, have emerged as promising solutions to improve both nutrient content and functional quality in wheat grain. This study aimed to investigate the effects of foliar-applied S and Se on yield, protein composition, mineral bioavailability, and dough properties in two common wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) varieties. Bologna and Sieve were selected as representative modern and old wheat varieties, respectively. A split-split-plot field experiment was conducted across two growing seasons under rainfed conditions in Tuscany, Italy. Treatments included five Se application rates (0–20.54 g Se ha⁻¹ as sodium selenite) and three S levels (0, 3.2, and 6.4 kg S ha⁻¹ as wettable S), applied at the watery ripe and booting stages, respectively. Bologna and Sieve were evaluated for agronomic performance, grain composition, and technological qualities. The key traits measured included yield components, free asparagine, phytic acid (Phy), protein fractions, mineral concentrations, dough strength and dough tenacity/extensibility ratio. Grain yield was not significantly affected by either Se or S treatments, reinforcing the dominant role of genotype. Protein concentration was strongly influenced by variety (86.05 % of total variation) and moderately by Se rate. S showed no significant effect on total protein but altered the composition, decreasing gliadin and increasing glutenin content. This shift modified the gliadin-to-glutenin ratio, with potential implications for dough rheology. The dough strength and dough tenacity/extensibility ratio were primarily genotype-dependent, though S-induced variety-specific responses. Phy, a key anti-nutrient, was significantly reduced by increasing Se levels. The resulting decline in Phy:Se, Phy:Fe, and Phy:Zn molar ratios indicate improved mineral bioavailability. Free asparagine, a precursor to the carcinogen acrylamide, was most affected by S treatment, which accounted for 82.5 % of the variation. Se further reduced free asparagine, particularly under adequate S conditions. This study demonstrates that while genotype was shown to predominantly control wheat quality traits, Se and S foliar applications significantly enhanced the nutritional value and processing quality of wheat grain. These findings support the adoption of targeted foliar fertilization strategies combining Se and S to improve wheat quality. Future research should investigate varietal responses under broader environmental conditions and refine application timing to maximize benefits. • Sulphur fertilization significantly reduced free asparagine levels in wheat grain. • Selenium application decreased phytic acid content and Phy:minerals molar ratios. • Sulphur and selenium affect gluten protein fractions in a genotype-dependent manner. • Sulphur enhanced glutenin and total gluten while reducing gliadin concentration. • Selenium and sulphur improved wheat grain nutritional quality without affecting yield.
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Selenium treatment did not significantly affect grain yield.
- Taxon
- wheat
Triticum aestivumt0 - Treatment
- See0
- Outcome
- Grain yielde0
- Direction
- not significantly affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Grain yield was not significantly affected by either Se or S treatments”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur treatment did not significantly affect grain yield.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Se0
- Outcome
- Grain yielde0
- Direction
- not significantly affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Grain yield was not significantly affected by either Se or S treatments”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Variety explained 86.05% of total protein concentration variation.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- varietye0
- Outcome
- Protein concentratione0
- Value
- 86.05 % of total variatione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Protein concentration was strongly influenced by variety (86.05 % of total variation)”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Selenium rate moderately influenced protein concentration.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Se ratee0
- Outcome
- Protein concentratione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Protein concentration was strongly influenced by variety (86.05 % of total variation) and moderately by Se rate”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur had no significant effect on total protein.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Se0
- Outcome
- total proteine0
- Direction
- no significant effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“S showed no significant effect on total protein”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur decreased gliadin content.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Se0
- Outcome
- gliadine0
- Direction
- decreasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreasing gliadin and increasing glutenin content”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur increased glutenin content.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Se0
- Outcome
- glutenin contente0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreasing gliadin and increasing glutenin content”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur shifted the gliadin-to-glutenin ratio.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Se0
- Outcome
- gliadin-to-glutenin ratioe0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This shift modified the gliadin-to-glutenin ratio”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Dough strength and tenacity to extensibility ratio depended primarily on genotype.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Material
- genotypee0
- Outcome
- dough strength and dough tenacity/extensibility ratioe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The dough strength and dough tenacity/extensibility ratio were primarily genotype-dependent”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur caused variety-specific responses in dough properties.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- Se0
- Outcome
- variety-specific responsese0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“S-induced variety-specific responses”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing selenium significantly reduced phytic acid.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- increasing Se levelse0
- Outcome
- Phye0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Phy, a key anti-nutrient, was significantly reduced by increasing Se levels”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Selenium reduced Phy:Se, Phy:Fe and Phy:Zn molar ratios.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- See0
- Outcome
- Phy:Se, Phy:Fe, and Phy:Zn molar ratiose0
- Direction
- declinee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decline in Phy:Se, Phy:Fe, and Phy:Zn molar ratios”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur treatment explained 82.5% of free asparagine variation.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- S treatmente0
- Outcome
- Free asparaginee0
- Value
- 82.5 % of the variatione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Free asparagine, a precursor to the carcinogen acrylamide, was most affected by S treatment, which accounted for 82.5 % of the variation”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
Sulphur fertilization reduced free asparagine in wheat grain.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Treatment
- Sulphur fertilizatione0
- Outcome
- free asparagine levelse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sulphur fertilization significantly reduced free asparagine levels in wheat grain”
Claim · model-written summary
Selenium further reduced free asparagine, especially with adequate sulphur.
- Taxon
- common wheatTriticum aestivumt0
- Treatment
- See0
- Outcome
- free asparaginee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- adequate S conditionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Se further reduced free asparagine, particularly under adequate S conditions”
t0“common wheat”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend combined targeted selenium and sulphur foliar fertilization to improve wheat quality.
- Taxon
- wheatTriticum aestivume0
- Outcome
- targeted foliar fertilization strategies combining Se and S to improve wheat qualitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“adoption of targeted foliar fertilization strategies combining Se and S to improve wheat quality”
The same questions in other papers
selenium atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
33 papers more in this group
See all 37 papers →sulfur atom · quality: protein · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 44 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
47 papers more in this group
See all 51 papers →sulfur atom · yield · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Results differ
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 124 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
144 papers more in this group
See all 148 papers →selenium atom · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →selenium atom · nutrient: content · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →sulfur atom · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
35 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →fertilization · molecular: metabolites · Triticum aestivum (wheat)Positive and negative results
231 papers in the same direction as this paper · 54 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
284 papers more in this group
See all 288 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.