Claim · model-written summary
Sub fertigation inhibited water uptake relative to drip fertigation.
- Taxon
- Tomatoes
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- Sub fertigatione0
- Outcome
- water uptakee0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
- Comparator
- drip fertigatione0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sub fertigation inhibited water uptake compared to drip fertigation.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Title
Shahnaz Sarkar; Yoshikazu Kiriiwa; Masanobu Endo; et al. Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticultural Science 2008. doi:10.2503/jjshs1.77.143
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Intervention effect Sub fertigation reduced growth, yield and fruit size across nutrient formulations.
- Intervention effect Sub fertigation increased fruit soluble solid content.
- Intervention effect Medium EC was higher under sub than drip fertigation.
- Intervention effect Medium EC was higher with Shizudai than Enshi formulation.
- Observation Sub × Shizudai had the highest medium EC at 29.6 dS·m−1.
- Observation Drip × Enshi had the lowest medium EC at 16.1 dS·m−1.
- Intervention effect Sub fertigation raised medium matric potential relative to drip fertigation.
- Intervention effect Leaf proline concentration was higher with sub than drip fertigation on the two sampling dates.
- Mechanism Authors attributed growth and yield suppression under sub fertigation mainly to salinity stress.