ArticleFrontiers in plant science2024
Unveiling the potential of cellulose nanofibre based nitrogen fertilizer and its transformative effect on
Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Fertilizer management is crucial to maintaining a balance between environmental health, plant health, and total crop yield. Farmers are overutilizing fertilizers with a mind set to enhance the productive capacity of the field, which adversely impacts soil fertility and causes serious environmental hazards. To mitigate the issues of over-utilization of fertilizers, controlled-release fertilizers were developed using nitrogen fertilizer (ammonium chloride) loaded on cellulose nanofibres (named CNF*N). Methodology: In this study, the effects of CNF*N were compared with commercial nitrogen fertilizer (ammonium chloride) on Results: It indicated that the growth parameters were best achieved in T6 treatment. Plant height was at its maximum in the T6 treatment (44.4 ±0.1cm) after the second harvest, whereas the minimum plant height was observed in T1, which was 39.1 ±0.1 cm. Root-to-shoot weight ratio was also maximum in T6 (0.183± 0.02) and minimum in T1 (0.07± 0.01) after second harvesting. The significant difference among the treatments was determined with Tukey's honestly significant difference (HSD). The nitrogen content (available and total) was significantly higher in the T4, T5, and T6 treatments (0.22, 0.25, and 0.28%) as compared to the control treatments (T1 (0.12%), T2 (0.13%), and T3 (0.14%) during the second harvesting stage (90 days), as nitrogen plays a crucial role in the development of vegetative growth in
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.