Figure 1.
Diagram of the literature search and trial selection process in the meta-analysis.
Soybean [Glycine max (L.)] has higher nitrogen requirements than other crops. We investigated the effects on soybean yield and quality of topdressing with nitrogen fertilizer. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied as a topdressing to soybeans at 0, 20, 30, and 40 kg ha−1 (N0, N20, N30, and N40 treatments, respectively); half of the total topdressing treatment was applied at the pre-flowering (R 1) stage and the other half at the post-flowering (R 2) stage. Yield was highest in the N20 treatment and decreased with larger quantities of topdressing. The protein and total amino acid content were highest in the N20 treatment but tended to decrease with a greater quantity of topdressing. contents of most individual amino acids peaked in the N20 or N30 treatments and decreased as topdressing quantity increased, although proline and arginine contents increased with quantity of topdressing. Isoflavone content tended to be highest in either the N30 or N20 treatment. The agronomic efficiency of nitrogen (AEN) was highest in the N20 treatment. There was a positive correlation between AEN and yield, protein, isoflavone, and amino acid content. Topdressing with 20 kg ha−1 N produced the highest yield, protein, and amino acid content. Topdressing with greater quantities of nitrogen fertilizer decreased the yield and quality of soybeans.
Citation: Yeon Ju Lee, Jong Hyuk Kim, Ju Hyeon Ha, Ha Yeon Nam, Il Rae Rho. Effects of nitrogen topdressing fertilization on yield and quality in soybeans[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2024, 9(4): 1004-1026. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2024054
| [1] | Xiaoli Zhang, Ziying Yu . Pathological analysis of hesperetin-derived small cell lung cancer by artificial intelligence technology under fiberoptic bronchoscopy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 8538-8558. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021423 |
| [2] | Ming Zhang, Yingying Zhou, Yanli Zhang . High Expression of TLR2 in the serum of patients with tuberculosis and lung cancer, and can promote the progression of lung cancer. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(3): 1959-1972. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020104 |
| [3] | Bijiong Wang, Yaodong Tang, Biyun Yu, Di Gui, Hui Xu . Expression of autophagy-related factor p62 for lung cancer diagnosis and prognosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 6805-6821. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019340 |
| [4] | Gaozhong Sun, Tongwei Zhao . Lung adenocarcinoma pathology stages related gene identification. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(1): 737-746. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020038 |
| [5] | Kunpeng Li, Zepeng Wang, Yu Zhou, Sihai Li . Lung adenocarcinoma identification based on hybrid feature selections and attentional convolutional neural networks. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2024, 21(2): 2991-3015. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2024133 |
| [6] | Guohai Wang, Zhiyuan Hu . Icotinib inhibits proliferation and epithelial-mesenchymal transition of non-small cell lung cancer A549 cells. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(6): 7707-7718. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019386 |
| [7] | Andreas Wagner, Pirmin Schlicke, Marvin Fritz, Christina Kuttler, J. Tinsley Oden, Christian Schumann, Barbara Wohlmuth . A phase-field model for non-small cell lung cancer under the effects of immunotherapy. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(10): 18670-18694. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023828 |
| [8] | Yong Ding, Jian-Hong Liu . The signature lncRNAs associated with the lung adenocarcinoma patients prognosis. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(2): 1593-1603. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020083 |
| [9] | Yongxing Li, Jianye Yang, Yufen Xu, Ming Zhang, Xiaoping Zhang, Wenyu Chen, Xiaodong Lv . A meta-analysis of the comparing of the first-generation and next-generation TKIs in the treatment of NSCLC. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2019, 16(5): 5687-5696. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2019283 |
| [10] | Lingling Li, Mengyao Shao, Xingshi He, Shanjing Ren, Tianhai Tian . Risk of lung cancer due to external environmental factor and epidemiological data analysis. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(5): 6079-6094. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021304 |
Soybean [Glycine max (L.)] has higher nitrogen requirements than other crops. We investigated the effects on soybean yield and quality of topdressing with nitrogen fertilizer. Nitrogen fertilizer was applied as a topdressing to soybeans at 0, 20, 30, and 40 kg ha−1 (N0, N20, N30, and N40 treatments, respectively); half of the total topdressing treatment was applied at the pre-flowering (R 1) stage and the other half at the post-flowering (R 2) stage. Yield was highest in the N20 treatment and decreased with larger quantities of topdressing. The protein and total amino acid content were highest in the N20 treatment but tended to decrease with a greater quantity of topdressing. contents of most individual amino acids peaked in the N20 or N30 treatments and decreased as topdressing quantity increased, although proline and arginine contents increased with quantity of topdressing. Isoflavone content tended to be highest in either the N30 or N20 treatment. The agronomic efficiency of nitrogen (AEN) was highest in the N20 treatment. There was a positive correlation between AEN and yield, protein, isoflavone, and amino acid content. Topdressing with 20 kg ha−1 N produced the highest yield, protein, and amino acid content. Topdressing with greater quantities of nitrogen fertilizer decreased the yield and quality of soybeans.
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death in men and the second leading cause (after breast cancer) in women worldwide; more than 1 million deaths are attributed to this disease annually [1,2,3]. Non-small-cell-lung cancer (NSCLC) accounts for approximately 80–85% of all lung malignancies, and presents as locally advanced NSCLC in approximately 25–30% of cases and as metastatic disease in approximately 40–50% of cases [4]. The preferred treatment for lung cancer is surgical resection; however, many patients with advanced NSCLC still experience relapse despite complete excision; the 5-year survival for patients who only undergo surgical treatment is less than 25% [5].
Platinum-based chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients who are ineligible for surgical treatment. Although patients may benefit from chemotherapy in the short term, their response rates are ultimately disappointing as most eventually experience recurrence. The screening, diagnosis, and treatment of NSCLC have made considerable progress over the past decade. Of note is the discovery of targetable molecular markers such as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors are the first-line treatments for patients with advanced NSCLC whose tumors are positive for EGFR mutations; these inhibitors increase treatment efficacy, decrease toxic effects, and improve outcomes [6,7,8]. However, EGFR mutations are found only in 10–30% of patients with NSCLC [9], and the initial treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC without genetic mutations remains platinum-based doublet chemotherapy [10]. Patients in whom second or later-line treatments fail have no effective treatment options available, although many are administered chemotherapy in practice [11].
Angiogenesis is essential for tumor growth and metastasis [12]. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), which activates the VEGF receptor (VEGFR), has long been known to have a critical role in promoting tumor angiogenesis [13]. Hence, VEGF and VEGFR are important targets in cancer therapy, and VEGF inhibition has been proven to be effective against many solid tumors [14,15,16]. The anti-VEGF antibody bevacizumab has been shown to significantly improve PFS and overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced NSCLC in several studies [17,18].
Apatinib, a novel orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of VEGFR-2, could inhibit VEGF-stimulated endothelial cell migration and proliferation and decrease tumor microvascular density, thus inhibiting the growth of tumors. This might lead to prolonging the survival time of patients. It has been shown to be efficient and safe for the treatment of multiple tumor types, such as breast and gastric cancers [14,16,19]. Apatinib also be used in patients with advanced NSCLC for second or later-line treatments [20]. When chemotherapy and/or targeted therapy fail, it might become a new option. However, the efficacy and safety of Apatinib in this case was not clear. The meta-analysis described herein was performed to assess the efficacy and toxicity of Apatinib in patients with advanced NSCLC.
In November 2017, we searched the PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), and Wanfang database for randomized controlled trials using the keywords ("NSCLC" OR "Carcinoma, Non-Small Cell Lung") AND ("Apatinib" OR "YN968D1") without language or year restrictions. The reference lists of recovered articles were also searched for related original and review articles to screen for additional trials.
Two investigators independently assessed candidate articles for inclusion. Any disagreements between the 2 assessments were resolved by discussion with a third investigator. The relevant studies were manually and carefully selected based on the following criteria: (1) randomized controlled trial, (2) patients had pathologically confirmed NSCLC, (3) studies compared the efficacy and toxicity of apatinib with a placebo or chemotherapy, we defined the treatment group without apatinib as the control group, and (4) studies contained sufficient data for extraction. The Cochrane collaboration's tool was used to evaluate the risk of bias in the studies [21].
The same 2 investigators independently extracted the necessary information from each of the included articles, then cross-checked the information. Discrepancies were settled by discussion with a third investigator.
The following information were collected from each study unless otherwise not available: First author, year of publication, number of patients, patient characteristics (such as sex), and outcomes (including median PFS, ORR, and DCR values; HRs for PFS and their 95% CIs; and adverse events such as hand-foot syndrome and hypertension).
RevMan 5.3 software (Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2014) was used to perform statistical analysis. The Engauge Digitizer 4.1 software was used to extract survival data from the Kaplan-Meier curves [22,23]. The pooled HRs for PFS, RRs for ORRs and DCRs, and ORs for different adverse events were calculated. The statistical heterogeneity between trials was evaluated by the Q-statistic [24]. A Q Statistic P-value < 0.1 or an I2 > 50% indicated significant statistical heterogeneity between studies, in which case a random-effects model was used to analyze the data. Otherwise, a fixed-effects model was used. Subetaoup analysis was used to reduce heterogeneity. A statistical test with a P-value < 0.05 was considered significant. An HR > 1 indicated a greater death or progression rate upon treatment with apatinib, an RR > 1 indicated a greater overall response, and an OR > 1 indicated greater toxicities due to therapy. All P-values were 2-sided, and all CIs had 2-sided probability coverages of 95%.
Fifty-eight candidate articles were identified by systematically searching the relevant databases using our search strategy, of which 5 qualified articles describing studies that compared the efficacy and toxicity of apatinib to controls in patients with advanced NSCLC were included based on our criteria (Figure 1) [20,25,26,27,28]. A study was excluded because the data was incomplete and ambiguous [29]. All the articles were written in Chinese, and all studies were conducted in China. The characteristics of these studies are shown in Table 1. The 5 clinical studies comprised 413 patients; the number of patients per study ranged from 39 to 135. Results of the analyses of risk of bias in the studies are shown in Figure 2.
| Study | Year | Comparison arms | Participants | Median PFS (mo) | ORR (%) | DCR (%) |
| Li Zhang | 2012 | Apatinib | 90 (44) | 4.7 | 12.2 | 68.9 |
| Placebo | 45 (23) | 1.9 | 0 | 24.4 | ||
| Jinling Bi | 2017 | Apatinib | 35 (-) | - | 17.1 | 65.7 |
| Docetaxel | 30 (-) | - | 10.0 | 46.7 | ||
| Erhong Chen | 2017 | Apatinib | 42 (26) | - | 50.0 | 95.2 |
| Paclitaxel | 42 (25) | - | 33.3 | 81.0 | ||
| Yunjie Guo | 2017 | Apatinib plus docetaxel | 19 (10) | 5.6 | 31.6 | 57.9 |
| Docetaxel | 20 (10) | 3.0 | 10.0 | 30.0 | ||
| Yongjing Liu | 2017 | Apatinib plus paclitaxel plus cisplatin | 45 (-) | - | 35.6 | 55.6 |
| Paclitaxel plus cisplatin | 45 (-) | - | 17.8 | 33.3 |
DownLoad:
CSV
Only 2 of the studies investigated PFS rates, with no significant heterogeneity between them (P = 0.34, I2 = 0%). We used the fixed-effects model to estimate the pooled hazard ratio (HR) for PFS, which showed that therapy with apatinib significantly improved PFS in patients with advanced NSCLC (HR: 0.32, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.21–0.48, P < 0.00001, Figure 3). Apatinib was used as a third- or later-line treatment in Li Zhang's study [20], so placebo was used as a control group. While in the study of Yunjie Guo [27], apatinib was used as a second-line treatment, it was not appropriate to use a placebo as the control group. However, no matter what treatment was used as the control group, apatinib benefited patients from PFS
All 5 studies investigated the ORR; there was no significant difference between them (P = 0.53, I2 = 0%). The total pooled RR for ORR, which was calculated using the fixed-effects model, was 2.03 (95% CI: 1.36–3.01, P = 0.0005), and was significantly higher in the apatinib group than the control group (Figure 4), indicating that apatinib improved the ORR. Subetaoup analysis revealed that the ORRs of the apatinib and chemotherapy groups were not significantly different (P = 0.09). However, the ORRs were significantly higher in the apatinib plus chemotherapy group than in the chemotherapy-only group (P = 0.02). When using placebo as the control group, ORR was lower than other studies using chemotherapy as the control group. The treatment group containing apatinib effectively improved ORR.
All 5 studies investigated the DCR; the differences between the studies were significant (P = 0.0003, I2 = 81%).The total pooled RR for the DCR (calculated using the random-effects model) was 1.66 (95% CI: 1.07–2.57, P = 0.02), and was significantly higher in apatinib-treated patients than in the control group (Figure 5). Subetaoup analysis was used to reduce heterogeneity. The differences between the studies' apatinib vs. chemotherapy-alone and apatinib plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy-alone groups were not significant (P = 0.38, I2 = 0%; and P = 0.75, I2 = 0%; respectively). The corresponding pooled RRs for DCR were 1.20 (95% CI: 1.03–1.40, P = 0.02) and 1.74 (95% CI: 1.15–2.63, P = 0.009), respectively, demonstrating that apatinib therapy significantly improved the DCR. DCR was lower in the placebo control group than that in chemotherapy control group. The treatment group with apatinib effectively improved DCR.
Gastrointestinal reaction, hand-foot syndrome, hypertension, thrombocytopenia, and hypoleucocytosis were the most common adverse events. The pooled OR was 1.34 (95% CI: 0.57–3.17) (Figure 6), indicating less toxicity in the control group than in the apatinib group; however, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.5). There was high heterogeneity (I2 = 81%) between the apatinib and control groups; therefore, a random-effects model was employed. For gastrointestinal reaction and hypoleucocytosis, the pooled OR were 0.66 (95% CI: 0.13–3.41) and 0.41 (95% CI: 0.04–3.80), respectively, indicating more gastrointestinal reaction and hypoleucocytosis in the control group than in the apatinib group; however, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.62 and P = 0.43). The heterogeneity (I2 = 84% and I2 = 89%) between the apatinib and control groups was significant. For hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, thrombocytopenia, the pooled OR were 11.83 (95% CI: 2.60–53.84), 3.77 (95% CI: 0.23–60.72) and 1.60 (95% CI: 0.39–6.56), respectively, indicating less hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, thrombocytopenia in the control group than in the apatinib group; The difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.51 and P = 0.35) for hand-foot syndrome and thrombocytopenia and the difference was statistically significant (P = 0.001) for hypertension. There was high heterogeneity (I2 = 83% and I2 = 67%) between the apatinib and control groups for hand-foot syndrome and thrombocytopenia. The heterogeneity (I2 = 18%) between the apatinib and control groups for hypertension was not significant. Subetaoup analysis showed that the differences between the studies in each category were statistically significant except for hypertension (I2 = 18%). The incidences of hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, and thrombocytopenia in the apatinib group were higher than those in the control group, although only in the hypertension group was the difference significant (OR: 11.83, 95% CI: 2.60–53.84, P = 0.001). The incidences of gastrointestinal reactions and hypoleucocytosis in the apatinib group were fewer than in the control group, although the differences were not statistically significant.
To our knowledge, ours is the first meta-analysis to assess the clinical benefit of apatinib as a post-first-line treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC. Our results demonstrated that apatinib therapy for advanced NSCLC as a second-or-subsequent-line treatment provides a substantial clinical benefit. Apatinib may therefore be a novel choice for patients with advanced NSCLC who fail second- or higher-line treatments, given that no standard treatment regimens are yet recommended for such patients.
Apatinib is a first-generation oral small molecule VEGFR inhibitor that has been independently researched and developed in China; its main target is VEGFR-2 [30]. Several studies have confirmed that blocking VEGFR-2 effectively inhibits angiogenesis [31,32], and apatinib has been approved by the China Food and Drug Administration for treating advanced or metastatic chemorefractory gastric cancer [14]. Several studies had been reported for the application of apatinib in patients with advanced NSCLC [33,34,35]. To date, the vast majority of studies involving apatinib for advanced NSCLC were conducted in China; therefore, all the papers evaluated in this meta-analysis were authored in China. Because we systematically assessed the efficacy and adverse reactions of apatinib in patients with advanced NSCLC in related randomized trials, the results of our study may be applicable to patients in other countries.
This meta-analysis covered all the currently published randomized studies in which apatinib was used as a post-first-line treatment for advanced NSCLC. The results confirmed that treatment with apatinib provided substantial clinical benefits for patients in term of PFS, ORR, and DCR. The ORR of the apatinib group was higher than that of the chemotherapy group, although the difference was not statistically significant. However, the difference in the ORRs of the apatinib plus chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy-only groups was significant. In terms of DCR, the differences between the studies in each subetaoup were not statistically significant (I2 = 0%), and all showed that apatinib provides a substantial benefit to patients with advanced NSCLC.
Overall survival is usually the endpoint for evaluating clinical benefit, whereas PFS is considered a surrogate endpoint. However, not all investigations included in our meta-analysis reported overall survival rates, assessment of which was therefore absent. The significant improvements in PFS, ORR, and DCR ought to be meaningful to the patients; therefore, a fair recommendation that apatinib be used to treat patients with advanced NSCLC is reasonable.
In general, the adverse events were similar among patients in the apatinib and control groups (P = 0.50), although there was high heterogeneity between the studies. The differences between the hypertension subetaoups in the studies were not statistically significant, even though the incidence of hypertension in the apatinib group was significantly higher than that in the control group. Hence, the results of other subetaoup analyses should be considered with caution.
There were several limitations in this study. First, the different methods of treatment contributed to increased clinical heterogeneity. Second, our meta-analysis was based on data extracted from published literature, not on individual patient data. Third, the quantity and quality of research included in this meta-analysis were limited; more high-quality randomized controlled trials are warranted to investigate the efficacy of apatinib against advanced NSCLC.
Apatinib is an effective choice for patients with advanced NSCLC, and produces a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in PFS, ORR, and DCR. Adverse reactions associated with apatinib were acceptable. Therapy with apatinib-based regimens is suggested for second- or later-line treatment of advanced NSCLC.
We express sincere gratitude to all the authors involved in this study.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
| [1] |
Bellaloui N, Bruns HA, Abbas HK, et al. (2015) Agricultural practices altered soybean seed protein, oil, fatty acids, sugars, and minerals in the Midsouth USA. Front Plant Sci 6: 31. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00031 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00031
|
| [2] |
Hanway JJ, Weber CR (1971) Accumulation of N, P, and K by soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill) plants. Agron J 63: 406–408. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj1971.00021962006300030017x. doi: 10.2134/agronj1971.00021962006300030017x
|
| [3] | Córdova SC, Archontoulis SV, Licht MA (2020) Soybean profitability and yield component response to nitrogen fertilizer in Iowa. Agrosystems Geosci Environ 3: e20092. https://doi.org/10.1002/agg2.20092 |
| [4] | Gai Z, Zhang J, Li C (2017) Effects of starter nitrogen fertilizer on soybean root activity, leaf photosynthesis and grain yield. PloS One 12: e0174841. https//doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174841 |
| [5] |
Tamagno S, Balboa GR, Assefa Y, et al. (2017) Nutrient partitioning and stoichiometry in soybean: A synthesis-analysis. Field Crops Res 200: 18–27. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2016.09.019 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.09.019
|
| [6] |
Salvagiotti F, Cassman KG, Specht JE, et al. (2008) Nitrogen uptake, fixation and response to fertilizer N in soybeans: A review. Field Crops Res 108: 1–13. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2008.03.001 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2008.03.001
|
| [7] |
Salvagiotti F, Specht JE, Cassman KG, et al. (2009) Growth and nitrogen fixation in high‐yielding soybean: Impact of nitrogen fertilization. Agron J 101: 958–970. https//doi.org/10.2134/agronj2008.0173x doi: 10.2134/agronj2008.0173x
|
| [8] | Hardy RWF, Burns RC, Hebert RR, et al. (1971) Biological nitrogen fixation: a key to world protein. Plant Soil 35: 561–590. |
| [9] |
Touchton JT, Rickerl DH (1986) Soybean growth and yield responses to starter fertilizers. Soil Sci Soc Am J 50: 234–237. https//doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1986.03615995005000010045x doi: 10.2136/sssaj1986.03615995005000010045x
|
| [10] |
Gan Y, Stulen I, Van Keulen H, et al. (2003) Effect of N fertilizer top-dressing at various reproductive stages on growth, N2 fixation and yield of three soybeans (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) genotypes. Field Crops Res 80: 147–155. https//doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(02)00171-5 doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(02)00171-5
|
| [11] |
Głowacka A, Jariene E, Flis-Olszewska E, et al. (2023) The Effect of nitrogen and sulfur application on soybean productivity traits in temperate climates conditions. Agronomy 13: 780. https//doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13030780 doi: 10.3390/agronomy13030780
|
| [12] |
Kaschuk G, Nogueira MA, De Luca MJ, et al. (2016) Response of determinate and indeterminate soybean cultivars to basal and topdressing N fertilization compared to sole inoculation with Bradyrhizobium. Field Crops Research 195: 21–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2016.05.010 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2016.05.010
|
| [13] | Zuffo AM, Ratke RF, Steiner F, et al. (2022) Agronomic characteristics of soybean cultivars with late-season nitrogen application in supplementation to the inoculation of Bradyrhizobium spp. Ciência e Agrotecnologia 46: e022521. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-7054202246022521 |
| [14] |
Moretti LG, Crusciol CAC, Bossolani JW, et al. (2020) Bacterial consortium and microbial metabolites increase grain quality and soybean yield. J Soil Sci Plant Nutr 20: 1923–1934. http://org/doi/10.1007/s42729-020-00263-5 doi: 10.1007/s42729-020-00263-5
|
| [15] |
Zilli JÉ, Pacheco RS, Gianluppi V, et al. (2021) Biological N2 fixation and yield performance of soybean inoculated with Bradyrhizobium. Nutr Cycling Agroecosyst 119: 323–336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-021-10128-7 doi: 10.1007/s10705-021-10128-7
|
| [16] | Córdova SC, Archontoulis SV, Licht MA (2020) Soybean profitability and yield component response to nitrogen fertilizer in Iowa. Agrosyst Geosci Environ 3: e20092. https//doi.org/10.1002/agg2.20092 |
| [17] |
Timotiwu PB, Nurmiaty N, Pramono E, et al. (2020) Growth and yield responses of four soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill.) cultivars to different methods of NPK fertilizer application. J Agric Sci 8: 39–43. https//doi.org/10.18196/pt.2020.112.39-43 doi: 10.18196/pt.2020.112.39-43
|
| [18] |
Khan Z, Ahmad B, Nauman Khan M, et al. (2022) Stand establishment, growth, and yield enhancement response of soybean to inoculation and NPK compound and organic fertilizers. Gesunde Pflanz 74: 1123–1135. https//doi.org/10.1007/s10343-022-00706-2 doi: 10.1007/s10343-022-00706-2
|
| [19] |
Gan Y, Stulen I, Keulen HV, et al. (2003) Effect of N fertilizer top-dressing at various reproductive stages on growth, N2 fixation and yield of three Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) genotypes. Field Crops Res 80: 147–155. https//doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4290(02)00171-5 doi: 10.1016/S0378-4290(02)00171-5
|
| [20] |
Montoya F, García C, Pintos F, et al. (2017). Effects of irrigation regime on the growth and yield of irrigated soybean in temperate humid climatic conditions. Agric Water Manag 193: 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2017.08.001 doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2017.08.001
|
| [21] |
Matoša Kočar M, Josipović M, Sudarić A, et al. (2023). Environment-and genotypedependent irrigation effect on soybean grain yield and grain quality. Appl Sci 13: 111. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13010111 doi: 10.3390/app13010111
|
| [22] |
Serafin-Andrzejewska M, Jama-Rodzeńska A, Helios W, et al. (2024) Influence of nitrogen fertilization, seed inoculation and the synergistic effect of these treatments on soybean yields under conditions in south-western Poland. Sci Rep 14: 6672. https//doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-57008-y doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-57008-y
|
| [23] |
Bakari R, Mungai N, Thuita M, et al. (2020) Impact of soil acidity and liming on soybean (Glycine max) nodulation and nitrogen fixation in Kenyan soils. Acta Agric Scand, Sect B—Soil Plant Sci 70: 667–678. https://doi.org/10.1080/09064710.2020.1833976 doi: 10.1080/09064710.2020.1833976
|
| [24] | Korea Meteorological Administration (2023) Climate statistical analysis. Available from: https://data.kma.go.kr. |
| [25] |
Schollenberger CJ (1927) A rapid approximate method for determining soil organic matter. Soil Sci 24: 65–68. https//doi.org/10.1097/00010694-192707000-00008 doi: 10.1097/00010694-192707000-00008
|
| [26] |
Salem HM, Valero C, Muñoz MÁ, et al. (2015) Short-term effects of four tillage practices on soil physical properties, soil water potential, and maize yield. Geoderma 237: 60–70. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.08.014 doi: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.08.014
|
| [27] |
Miller WP, Miller DM (1987) A micro‐pipette method for soil mechanical analysis. Commun Soil Sci Plant Anal 18: 1–15. https//doi.org/10.1080/00103628709367799 doi: 10.1080/00103628709367799
|
| [28] | National Institute of Agricultural Science and Technology (2010) Method of soil and plant analysis. Suwon (Korea): Rural Development Administration, 69–70. |
| [29] |
Wang X, Wu X, Zhou Q, et al. (2022) Physiological response of soybean plants to water deficit. Front Plant Sci 12: 80962. https//doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.80962 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.80962
|
| [30] | Dobermann A (2007) Nutrient use efficiency—measurement and management. In: Krauss A, Isherwood K, Heffer P (Eds.), Fertilizer best management practices: general principles, strategy for their adoption and voluntary Initiatives versus regulations, University of Nebraska: International Fertilizer Industry Association, 1–28. |
| [31] |
Kim IS (2022) Current perspectives on the beneficial effects of soybean isoflavones and their metabolites on plants. Food Sci Biotechnol 31: 515–526. https//doi.org/10.1007/s10068-022-01070-7 doi: 10.1007/s10068-022-01070-7
|
| [32] |
Lee S, Lee YB, Kim HS (2013) Analysis of the general and functional components of various soybeans. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 42: 1255–1262. https//doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2013.42.8.1255 doi: 10.3746/jkfn.2013.42.8.1255
|
| [33] |
Sim EY, Lee YY, Park HY, et al. (2020) Quality characteristics of tofu made from Korean soybean cultivars. Food Eng Prog 24: 54–61. https//doi.org/10.9799/ksfan.2020.33.6.710 doi: 10.9799/ksfan.2020.33.6.710
|
| [34] |
Xu C, He Y, Sun S, et al. (2002) Analysis of soybean yield formation differences across different production regions in China. Agron J 112: 4195–4206. https//doi.org/10.1002/agj2.20373 doi: 10.1002/agj2.20373
|
| [35] |
Borowska M, Prusiński J (2021) Effect of soybean cultivars sowing dates on seed yield and its correlation with yield parameters. Plant Soil Environ 67: 360–366. https//doi.org/10.17221/73/2021-PSE doi: 10.17221/73/2021-PSE
|
| [36] |
Xu C, Li R, Song W, et al. (2021) Responses of branch number and yield component of soybean cultivars tested in different planting densities. Agriculture 11: 69. https//doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11010069 doi: 10.3390/agriculture11010069
|
| [37] |
Teng W, Han Y, Du Y, et al. (2009) QTL analyses of seed weight during the development of soybean (Glycine max L. Merr.). Heredity 102: 372–380. https//doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2008.108 doi: 10.1038/hdy.2008.108
|
| [38] |
Orlowski JM, Gregg GL, Lee CD (2016) Early‐season lactofen application has limited effect on soybean branch and mainstem yield components. Crop Sci 56: 432–438. https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2015.08.0482 doi: 10.2135/cropsci2015.08.0482
|
| [39] |
Kantolic AG, Slafer GA (2007) Development and seed number in indeterminate soybean as affected by timing and duration of exposure to long photoperiods after flowering. Ann Bot 99: 925–933. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcm033 doi: 10.1093/aob/mcm033
|
| [40] |
Suhre JJ, Weidenbenner NH, Rowntree SC, et al. (2014) Soybean yield partitioning changes revealed by genetic gain and seeding rate interactions. Agron J 106: 1631–1642. https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj14.0003 doi: 10.2134/agronj14.0003
|
| [41] |
Wesley TL, Lamond RE, Martin VL, et al. (1998) Effects of late‐season nitrogen fertilizer on irrigated soybean yield and composition. J Prod Agric 11: 331–336. https//doi.org/10.2134/jpa1998.0331 doi: 10.2134/jpa1998.0331
|
| [42] |
Chen H, Zhou J, Li B, et al. (2019) Yield-scaled N2O emissions as affected by nitrification inhibitor and overdose fertilization under an intensively managed vegetable field: A three-year field study. Atmos Environ 206: 247–257. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.02.036 doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2019.02.036
|
| [43] |
Kim JH, Kang CK, Rho IR (2023) Growth and yield responses of soybean according to subsurface fertigation. Agron J 115: 1877–1891. https//doi.org/10.1002/agj2.21395 doi: 10.1002/agj2.21395
|
| [44] |
Wood CW, Torbert HA, Weaver DB (1993) Nitrogen fertilizer effects on soybean growth, yield, and seed composition. J Prod Agric 6: 354–360. https//doi.org/10.2134/jpa1993.0354 doi: 10.2134/jpa1993.0354
|
| [45] |
Guo K, Yang J, Yu N, et al. (2023) Biological nitrogen fixation in cereal crops: Progress, strategies, and perspectives. Plant Commun 4: 100499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xplc.2022.100499 doi: 10.1016/j.xplc.2022.100499
|
| [46] | Boroomandan P, Khoramivafa M, Haghi Y, et al. (2009) The effects of nitrogen starter fertilizer and plant density on yield, yield components and oil and protein content of soybean (Glycine max L. Merr). Pak J Biol Sci 12: 378–382. https://doi.org/pjbs.2009.384.382 |
| [47] |
Shin P, Sang WG, Kim JH, et al. (2020) Effects of high temperature and drought on yield and quality of soybean. Korean J Crop Sci 65: 346–352. https//doi.org/10.7740/kjcs.2020.65.4.346 doi: 10.7740/kjcs.2020.65.4.346
|
| [48] |
Kim HJ, Seo JH, Won DJ, et al. (2022) Comparison of physicochemical properties of seed protein in soybean cultivars. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 51: 1048–1055. https//doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2022.51.10.1048 doi: 10.3746/jkfn.2022.51.10.1048
|
| [49] |
Sobko O, Stahl A, Hahn V, et al. (2020) Environmental effects on soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr) production in central and south Germany. Agron J 10: 1847. https//doi.org/10.3390/agronomy10121847 doi: 10.3390/agronomy10121847
|
| [50] | Carrera CS, Reynoso CM, Funes GJ, et al. (2011) Amino acid composition of soybean seeds as affected by climatic variables. Pesq Agrpoec Bras 4: 579–1587. https//doi.org/10.1590/S0100-204X2011001200001 |
| [51] |
Szostak B, Glowacka A, Kasiczak A, et al. (2019) Nutritional value of soybeans and the yield of protein and fat depending on the cultivar and nitrogen application. J Elem 25: 45–57. https//doi.org/10.5601/jelem.2019.24.2.1769 doi: 10.5601/jelem.2019.24.2.1769
|
| [52] |
Ray JD, Fritschi FB, Heatherly LG (2006) Large applications of fertilizer N at planting affects seed protein and oil concentration and yield in the early soybean production system. Field Crops Res 99: 67–74. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2006.03.006 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2006.03.006
|
| [53] |
La Menza NC, Monzon JP, Specht JE, et al. (2017) Is soybean yield limited by nitrogen supply? Field Crops Res 213: 204–212. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.08.009 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.08.009
|
| [54] |
Kenedy EE, Philip JB, Kenneth CS, et al. (2023) Nitrogen fertilizer effects on soybean physiology, yield components, seed yield and protein content in the Southeastern United States, J Plant Nutr 46: 462–472. https//doi.org/10.1080/01904167.2022.2084106 doi: 10.1080/01904167.2022.2084106
|
| [55] |
Mourtzinis S, Gaspar AP, Naeve SL, et al. (2017) Planting date, maturity, and temperature effects on soybean seed yield and composition. Agron J 109: 2040–2049. https//doi.org/10.2134/agronj2017.05.0247 doi: 10.2134/agronj2017.05.0247
|
| [56] |
Lyu X, Liu Y, Li N, et al. (2022) Foliar applications of various nitrogen (N) forms to winter wheat affect grain protein accumulation and quality via N metabolism and remobilization. Crop J 10: 1165–1177. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.cj.2021.10.009 doi: 10.1016/j.cj.2021.10.009
|
| [57] |
Kim JY, Kwon SH, Hwang BS, et al. (2021) Changes in isoflavone composition of soybean according to processing methods. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 50: 403–409. https//doi.org/10.3746/jkfn.2021.50.4.403 doi: 10.3746/jkfn.2021.50.4.403
|
| [58] |
Kim EH, Lee OK, Kim JK, et al. (2014) Isoflavones and anthocyanins analysis in soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merill) from three different planting locations in Korea. Field Crops Res 156: 76–83. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2013.10.020 doi: 10.1016/j.fcr.2013.10.020
|
| [59] |
Hasanah Y, Nisa TC, Armidin H, et al. (2015) Isoflavone content of soybean[Glycine max (L). Merr.] cultivars with different nitrogen sources and growing season under dry land conditions. J Agric Envion Int Dev 109: 5–17. https//doi.org/10.12895/jaeid.20151.216. doi: 10.12895/jaeid.20151.216
|
| [60] |
Laurenz R, Tumbalam P, Naeve S, et al. (2017) Determination of isoflavone (genistein and daidzein) concentration of soybean seed as affected by environment and management inputs. J Sci Food Agric 97: 3342–3347. https//doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.8184 doi: 10.1002/jsfa.8184
|
| [61] |
Sugiyama A, Yamazaki Y, Hamamoto S, et al. (2017) Synthesis and secretion of isoflavones by field-grown soybean. Plant Cell Physiol 58: 1594–1600. https//doi.org/10.1093/pcp/pcx084 doi: 10.1093/pcp/pcx084
|
| [62] |
Sohn SI, Pandian S, Oh YJ, et al. (2021) Metabolic engineering of isoflavones: an updated overview. Front Plant Sci 12: 670103. https//doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2021.670103. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.670103
|
| [63] | Lee MS, Park JC, Oh YJ, et al. (2006) Effect of nitrogen fertilization levels on growth and isoflavone content in soybean. Korean J Crop Sci 51: 445–450. |
| [64] |
Macák M, Candráková E (2013) The effect of fertilization on yield components and quality parameters of soybeans[(Glycine max (L.) Merr.] seeds. J Cent Eur Agric 14: 379–389. https//doi.org/10.5513/JCEA01/14.3.1332 doi: 10.5513/JCEA01/14.3.1332
|
| [65] |
Korber AHC, Pinto LP, Pivetta LA, et al. (2017) Adubaç ã o nitrogenada e potássica em soja sob sistemas de semeadura. Revista de Agricultura Neotropical 4: 38–45. https://doi.org/10.32404/rean.v4i4.1653 doi: 10.32404/rean.v4i4.1653
|
| [66] |
Zuffo AM, Steiner F, Busch A, et al. (2018) Response of early soybean cultivars to nitrogen fertilization associated with Bradyrhizobium japonicum inoculation. Pesquisa Agropecuária Tropical 48: 436–446. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-40632018v4852637 doi: 10.1590/1983-40632018v4852637
|
| [67] | Zuffo AM, Ratke RF, Aguilera JG, et al. (2021) Bradyrhizobium spp. inoculation associated with nitrogen application enhances the quality of soybean seeds. Ciência e Agrotecnologia 45: e018721. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-7054202145018721 |
| [68] |
Dellero Y (2020) Manipulating amino acid metabolism to improve crop nitrogen use efficiency for a sustainable agriculture. Front Plant Sci 11: 602548. https//doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.602548 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.602548
|
| [69] |
Sharma S, Verslues PE (2010) Mechanisms independent of abscisic acid (ABA) or proline feedback have a predominant role in transcriptional regulation of proline metabolism during low water potential and stress recovery. Plant Cell Environ 33: 1838–1851. https//doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3040.2010.02188.x doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3040.2010.02188.x
|
| [70] |
Sánchez E, López-Lefebre LR, García PC, et al. (2001) Proline metabolism in response to highest nitrogen dosages in green bean plants (Phaseolus vulgaris L. cv. Strike). J Plant Physiol 158: 593–598. https//doi.org/10.1078/0176-1617-00268 doi: 10.1078/0176-1617-00268
|
| [71] |
Winter G, Todd CD, Trovato M, et al. (2015) Physiological implications of arginine metabolism in plants. Front Plant Sci 6: 534. https//doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00534 doi: 10.3389/fpls.2015.00534
|
| [72] |
Li Y, Lv Y, Lian M, et al. (2021) Effects of combined glycine and urea fertilizer application on the photosynthesis, sucrose metabolism, and fruit development of peach. Sci Hortic 289: 110504. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2021.110504 doi: 10.1016/j.scienta.2021.110504
|
| [73] |
Zhao C, Ma G, Zhou L, et al. (2021) Effects of nitrogen levels on gene expression and amino acid metabolism in Welsh onion. BMC Genom 22: 10. https//doi.org/10.1186/s12864-021-08130-y doi: 10.1186/s12864-021-08130-y
|
| [74] |
Ham GE, Liener IE, Evans SD, et al. (1975) Yield and composition of soybean seed as affected by N and S fertilization. Agron J 67: 293–297. https//doi.org/10.2134/agronj1975.00021962006700030004x doi: 10.2134/agronj1975.00021962006700030004x
|
| [75] |
Takahashi M, Uematsu Y, Kashiwaba K, et al. (2003) Accumulation of high levels of free amino acids in soybean seeds through integration of mutations conferring seed protein deficiency. Planta 217: 577–586. https//doi.org/10.1007/s00425-003-1026-3 doi: 10.1007/s00425-003-1026-3
|
| [76] |
Ali S, Abbas Z, Seleiman MF, et al. (2020) Glycine betaine accumulation, significance and interests for heavy metal tolerance in plants. Plants 9: 896. https//doi.org/10.3390/plants9070896 doi: 10.3390/plants9070896
|
| [77] | Barczak B, Knapowski T, Kozera W, et al. (2014) Effects of sulphur fertilization on the content and uptake of macroelements in narrow-leaf lupin. Rom Agric Res 31: 245–251. |
| [78] |
Bobrecka-Jamro D, Jarecki W, Buczek J (2018) Response of soya bean to different nitrogen fertilization levels. J Elem 23: 559–568. https//doi.org/10.5601/jelem.2017.22.3.1435 doi: 10.5601/jelem.2017.22.3.1435
|
| [79] |
Lee JS, Kim LH, Hwang TT (2021) Variation in protein and isoflavone contents of collected domestic and foreign soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merrill) germplasms in Korea. Agriculture 11: 735. https//doi.org/10.3390/agriculture11080735 doi: 10.3390/agriculture11080735
|
| 1. | Guocan Yu, Yanqin Shen, Xudong Xu, Fangming Zhong, Sherief Ghozy, Anlotinib for refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis, 2020, 15, 1932-6203, e0242982, 10.1371/journal.pone.0242982 | |
| 2. | Guocan Yu, Qingshan Cai, Xudong Xu, Yanqin Shen, Kan Xu, Sherief Ghozy, Anlotinib-containing regimen for advanced small-cell lung cancer: A protocol of meta-analysis, 2021, 16, 1932-6203, e0247494, 10.1371/journal.pone.0247494 | |
| 3. | Qiang Li, You-Seok Kim, Ju-Hyun An, Jin-Ah Kwon, Sang-Hyun Han, Woo-Jin Song, Hwa-Young Youn, Anti-tumor effects of rivoceranib against canine melanoma and mammary gland tumour in vitro and in vivo mouse xenograft models, 2021, 17, 1746-6148, 10.1186/s12917-021-03026-1 | |
| 4. | Zhe Li, Zhibao Liu, Yuanyuan Wu, Huarui Li, Zhen Sun, Chenggang Han, Xiaoling Zhang, Jinghua Zhang, Efficacy and safety of apatinib alone or apatinib plus paclitaxel/docetaxel versus paclitaxel/docetaxel in the treatment of advanced non‐small cell lung cancer: A meta‐analysis, 2021, 12, 1759-7706, 2838, 10.1111/1759-7714.14131 | |
| 5. | Ningjie Li, Ping Yang, Jun Fang, Transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) plus apatinib vs. TACE alone for hepatocellular carcinoma, 2022, 46, 22107401, 102022, 10.1016/j.clinre.2022.102022 | |
| 6. | Ling Zhou, Wenchao Zhang, Yi Xiang, Zijun Qian, Jianping Zhou, Lei Ni, Yun Feng, Beili Gao, The apatinib and pemetrexed combination has antitumor and antiangiogenic effects against NSCLC, 2023, 18, 2391-5412, 10.1515/biol-2022-0533 | |
| 7. | Xin Zhang, Haoran Huo, Yanan Nie, Jiadong Xue, Zengjiang Yuan, Zhenyi Zhang, Apatinib as a Third-Line Treatment for HER2-Positive Metastatic Gastric Cancer: A Multi-Center Single-Arm Cohort Study, 2022, 22, 2093-582X, 408, 10.5230/jgc.2022.22.e33 | |
| 8. | Haiming Chen, Xinfu Liu, Minhong He, Weiguang Gu, Yiyu Lu, Apatinib successfully administered in malignant tumour patients with severe hypotension: a case series, literature review, and considerations for treatment, 2023, 51, 0300-0605, 10.1177/03000605231177186 | |
| 9. | Jianping Xu, Xiaoyan Liu, Sheng Yang, Yuankai Shi, Efficacy, safety, and prognostic factors of apatinib plus platinum doublet chemotherapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer, 2022, 18, 0973-1482, 1425, 10.4103/jcrt.jcrt_1853_21 |
Figures(3) / Tables(9)
Yeon Ju Lee, Jong Hyuk Kim, Ju Hyeon Ha, Ha Yeon Nam, Il Rae Rho. Effects of nitrogen topdressing fertilization on yield and quality in soybeans[J]. AIMS Agriculture and Food, 2024, 9(4): 1004-1026. doi: 10.3934/agrfood.2024054
| Study | Year | Comparison arms | Participants | Median PFS (mo) | ORR (%) | DCR (%) |
| Li Zhang | 2012 | Apatinib | 90 (44) | 4.7 | 12.2 | 68.9 |
| Placebo | 45 (23) | 1.9 | 0 | 24.4 | ||
| Jinling Bi | 2017 | Apatinib | 35 (-) | - | 17.1 | 65.7 |
| Docetaxel | 30 (-) | - | 10.0 | 46.7 | ||
| Erhong Chen | 2017 | Apatinib | 42 (26) | - | 50.0 | 95.2 |
| Paclitaxel | 42 (25) | - | 33.3 | 81.0 | ||
| Yunjie Guo | 2017 | Apatinib plus docetaxel | 19 (10) | 5.6 | 31.6 | 57.9 |
| Docetaxel | 20 (10) | 3.0 | 10.0 | 30.0 | ||
| Yongjing Liu | 2017 | Apatinib plus paclitaxel plus cisplatin | 45 (-) | - | 35.6 | 55.6 |
| Paclitaxel plus cisplatin | 45 (-) | - | 17.8 | 33.3 |
DownLoad:
CSV
| Study | Year | Comparison arms | Participants | Median PFS (mo) | ORR (%) | DCR (%) |
| Li Zhang | 2012 | Apatinib | 90 (44) | 4.7 | 12.2 | 68.9 |
| Placebo | 45 (23) | 1.9 | 0 | 24.4 | ||
| Jinling Bi | 2017 | Apatinib | 35 (-) | - | 17.1 | 65.7 |
| Docetaxel | 30 (-) | - | 10.0 | 46.7 | ||
| Erhong Chen | 2017 | Apatinib | 42 (26) | - | 50.0 | 95.2 |
| Paclitaxel | 42 (25) | - | 33.3 | 81.0 | ||
| Yunjie Guo | 2017 | Apatinib plus docetaxel | 19 (10) | 5.6 | 31.6 | 57.9 |
| Docetaxel | 20 (10) | 3.0 | 10.0 | 30.0 | ||
| Yongjing Liu | 2017 | Apatinib plus paclitaxel plus cisplatin | 45 (-) | - | 35.6 | 55.6 |
| Paclitaxel plus cisplatin | 45 (-) | - | 17.8 | 33.3 |
