Cited by 72Heavy metals in environmentPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsAgricultural Science and Fertilization

Effect of Organic and Conventional Crop Rotation, Fertilization, and Crop Protection Practices on Metal Contents in Wheat (Triticum aestivum)

Cooper, Julia, Sanderson, Roy, Cakmak, Ismail, Ozturk, Levent, Shotton, Peter, Carmichael, Andrew, Haghighi, Reza Sadrabadi, Tetard-Jones, Catherine +3 more·2011·Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

Abstract

The effects of organic versus conventional crop management practices (crop rotation, crop protection, and fertility management strategies) on wheat yields and grain metal (Al, Cd, Cu, Ni, Pb, and Zn) concentrations were investigated in a long-term field trial. The interactions between crop management practices and the season that the crop was grown were investigated using univariate and redundancy analysis approaches. Grain yields were highest where conventional fertility management and crop protection practices were used, but growing wheat after a previous crop of grass/clover was shown to partially compensate for yield reductions due to the use of organic fertility management. All metals except for Pb were significantly affected by crop management practices and the year that the wheat was grown. Grain Cd and Cu levels were higher on average when conventional fertility management practices were used. Al and Cu were higher on average when conventional crop protection practices were used. The results demonstrate that there is potential to manage metal concentrations in the diet by adopting specific crop management practices shown to affect crop uptake of metals.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/jf104389m

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cooper, J., Sanderson, R., Cakmak, I., Ozturk, L., Shotton, P., Carmichael, A., Haghighi, R. S., Tetard-Jones, C., Volakakis, N., Eyre, M., & Leifert, C.
Affiliations
  • Newcastle University (GB)
  • Faculty of Engineering and Natural Science, Sabanci University, 34956 Istanbul, Turkey
  • Nafferton Ecological Farming Group, School of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (AFRD), Newcastle University, Stocksfield, Northumberland, NE42 7XD, U.K.
  • Islamic Azad University, Mashhad (IR)
Corresponding author
Leifert, Carlo
Venue
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Published
2011-04-15
Volume
59
Issue
9
Pages
4715-4724
ISSN
  • 0021-8561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5118
OpenAlex
W2080056544
Cited by
72
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
5.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Sabanci University (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Heavy metals in environment
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Soil Science › Agricultural Science and Fertilization
Keywords
organic farming, conventional farming, crop rotation, fertilization, crop protection, wheat, cadmium, copper, aluminum, nickel, lead, zinc, grain yield, long-term field experiment
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Fertilization, Fertilizers, Metals, Soil Pollutants, Triticum

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review