↓ Skip to main content

Split Nitrogen Application Improves Wheat Baking Quality by Influencing Protein Composition Rather Than Concentration

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Split Nitrogen Application Improves Wheat Baking Quality by Influencing Protein Composition Rather Than Concentration
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2016.00738
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cheng Xue, Gunda Schulte auf’m Erley, Anne Rossmann, Ramona Schuster, Peter Koehler, Karl-Hermann Mühling

Abstract

The use of late nitrogen (N) fertilization (N application at late growth stages of wheat, e.g., booting, heading or anthesis) to improve baking quality of wheat has been questioned. Although it increases protein concentration, the beneficial effect on baking quality (bread loaf volume) needs to be clearly understood. Two pot experiments were conducted aiming to evaluate whether late N is effective under controlled conditions and if these effects result from increased N rate or N splitting. Late N fertilizers were applied either as additional N or split from the basal N at late boot stage or heading in the form of nitrate-N or urea. Results showed that late N fertilization improved loaf volume of wheat flour by increasing grain protein concentration and altering its composition. Increasing N rate mainly enhanced grain protein quantitatively. However, N splitting changed grain protein composition by enhancing the percentages of gliadins and glutenins as well as certain high molecular weight glutenin subunits (HMW-GS), which led to an improved baking quality of wheat flour. The late N effects were greater when applied as nitrate-N than urea. The proportions of glutenin and x-type HMW-GS were more important than the overall protein concentration in determining baking quality. N splitting is more effective in improving wheat quality than the increase in the N rate by late N, which offers the potential to cut down N fertilization rates in wheat production systems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Sweden 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 20%
Student > Master 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 15 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 53%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Engineering 2 3%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Chemistry 2 3%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 20 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 June 2016.
All research outputs
#18,461,618
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#13,812
of 20,264 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#254,747
of 339,120 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#309
of 525 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,264 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,120 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 525 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.