Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Irrigation cutoff 40 to 50 days preharvest increased fruit SSC relative to the standard grower cutoff at 20 days preharvest.

A claim from Managing Fruit Soluble Solids with Late-season Deficit Irrigation in Drip-irrigated Processing Tomato Production · 2005

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation cutoff 40 to 50 days preharvest increased fruit SSC relative to the standard grower cutoff at 20 days preharvest.

Taxon
Processing Tomatot0
Treatment
Irrigation cutoff 40 to 50 days preharveste1
Outcome
SSCe1
Direction
increasede1
Comparator
standard grower practice of irrigation cutoff 20 days preharveste0
Setting
drip-irrigated field trials in Californiae2

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleValueQualifier

Verbatim

t0

“Managing Fruit Soluble Solids with Late-season Deficit Irrigation in Drip-irrigated Processing Tomato Production”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–112
e1

“Irrigation cutoff 40 to 50 days preharvest increased SSC but resulted in substantial yield loss, with significantly reduced brix yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 605–739
e0

“were compared to a standard grower practice of irrigation cutoff 20 days preharvest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 520–603
e2

“was investigated in a series of drip-irrigated field trials in California”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 277–350

Title

Managing Fruit Soluble Solids with Late-season Deficit Irrigation in Drip-irrigated Processing Tomato Production

P.R. Johnstone; T.K. Hartz; M. LeStrange; et al. HortScience 2005. doi:10.21273/hortsci.40.6.1857

Other claims from this paper (8)

Record rev-1bf41a7fc76adff39c96403fd7322beb54c74d0f17a76ddddca5a5bd49c1e3b0 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

irrigation · molecular: metabolites · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

51 papers: 33 positive, 18 negative or no effect

32 papers in the same direction as this claim · 18 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. negative
  4. no effect
  5. negative
  6. negative
  7. negative
  8. negative

42 papers more in this group

See all 51 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.