Intervention effectmodel-written summary

The high-water Actosol and EM treatment increased fruit weight, yield per plant and plastic-house yield in both seasons.

A claim from EFFECT OF IRRIGATION WATER QUANTITY AND SOME BIOSTIMULANTS ON PLANT WATER RELATIONSHIP, WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTIVITY OF TOMATO GROWN IN PLASTIC HOUSE · 2017

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

The high-water Actosol and EM treatment increased fruit weight, yield per plant and plastic-house yield in both seasons.

Taxon
tomato plantsSolanum lycopersicume0
Treatment
high level of water (153 m3/plastic house) combined with Actosol + Effective microorganism (EM) as soil applicatione0
Interactor
Effective microorganism (EM)e0symbiont
Outcome
fruit weight, yield/plant and total yield/ plastic housee0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“tomato plants which irrigated with high level of water (153 m3/plastic house) combined with Actosol + Effective microorganism (EM) as soil application, significantly increased main stem length, number of leaves/main stem, and dry weight of main stem, total and free water (%) in leaf tissues, fruit weight, yield/plant and total yield/ plastic house”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 446–795

Title

EFFECT OF IRRIGATION WATER QUANTITY AND SOME BIOSTIMULANTS ON PLANT WATER RELATIONSHIP, WATER USE EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTIVITY OF TOMATO GROWN IN PLASTIC HOUSE

Manal Mandour Zagazig Journal of Agricultural Research 2017. doi:10.21608/zjar.2017.53940

Other claims from this paper (5)

Record rev-68e8a77b85b017fb92ffab22d9420527cd7a6efcf616b1ade5f6759f42cec981 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 3 in the model’s answer

protected cultivation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ

24 papers: 22 positive, 2 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this claim · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
    High tunnels did not increase total tomato yield compared with the open field.

    Influence of High Tunnel Production and Planting Date on Yield, Growth, and Early Blight Development on Organically Grown Heirloom and Hybrid Tomato · 2012 · compared with open field

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    Tunnel-grown tomato yields over a 30-day period were less than field yields.

    HIGH TUNNELS EXTEND THE SEASON FOR TOMATOES · 1992 · compared with the field

    Opposite direction

  3. positive
    Yields were 33% greater in the high tunnel system than in the field system in the second year.

    High Tunnel and Field Production of Organic Heirloom Tomatoes: Yield, Fruit Quality, Disease, and Microclimate · 2012 · compared with field system

    Same direction

  4. positive
    Polyhouse tomato plants had increased plant height, number of branches per plant and rate of leaf area expansion compared with open-field plants.

    Phenological Development and Production Potentials of Tomato under Polyhouse Climate · 2010 · compared with open field

    Same direction

  5. positive
    Polyhouse tomato fruit yield was higher at 2.6 kg plant-1 than open-field yield at 1.5 kg plant-1.

    Tomato Fruit Quality under Protected Environment and Open Field Conditions · 2014 · compared with open field

    Same direction

  6. positive
    Polyhouse cultivation produced 136.12% more yield per ha than open field cultivation.

    Performance of tomato under greenhouse and open field conditions in the trans-Himalayan region of India · 2019 · compared with open field cultivation

    Same direction

  7. positive
    High tunnels raised tomato yield in 2010.

    The Effect of Open-Ended High Tunnels in Western Washington on Late Blight and Physiological Leaf Roll Among Five Tomato Cultivars · 2014 · compared with open-field production

    Same direction

  8. positive
    Pepper and tomato yields were greater in high tunnels than open fields.

    Yields, Fruit Quality, and Water Use in a Jalapeno Pepper and Tomatoes under Open Field and High-tunnel Production Systems in the Texas High Plains · 2020 · compared with OF

    Same direction

15 papers more in this group

See all 24 papers →

inoculation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

201 papers: 172 positive, 29 negative or no effect

171 papers in the same direction as this claim · 27 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    Effective microorganism application reduced tomato leaf dry matter yield, number of leaves, and number of trusses.

    Effects of the integrated use of effective micro-organisms, compost and mineral fertilizer on greenhouse-grown tomato · 2012

    Opposite directionCited by this paper

  2. positive
    EM seed inoculation increased tomato commercial yield by 40%.

    The studies on applying of Effective Microorganisms (EM) and CRF on nutrient contents in leaves and yielding of tomato. · 2014

    Same directionCited by this paper

  3. negative
    Reduced chemical fertilizer plus Trichoderma inoculant alone decreased tomato yield by 6–38% against control.

    Bio-organic fertilizer with reduced rates of chemical fertilization improves soil fertility and enhances tomato yield and quality · 2020 · compared with control

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Inoculated controls yielded 63% of uninoculated controls in 1995.

    Effect of Bactericides on Population Sizes and Spread of Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. michiganensis on Tomatoes in the Greenhouse and on Disease Development and Crop Yield in the Field · 2000 · compared with uninoculated controls

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    The CP+ line showed no fruit yield reduction after inoculation with U1 or PV230, unlike inoculated control plants.

    Field Resistance of Transgenic Tomatoes Expressing the Tobacco Mosaic Virus or Tomato Mosaic Virus Coat Protein Genes · 1992 · compared with inoculated control plants

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Yield accumulation was significantly reduced in tomato plants inoculated within the window of vulnerability compared with those inoculated later.

    Effects of plant age on disease development and virulence of Clavibacter michiganensis subsp. michiganensis on tomato · 2012 · compared with those inoculated after this period

    Opposite direction

  7. negative
    Severe disease from artificial inoculation reduced yield 10% to 34% in some cultivars.

    MEASURING EARLY BLIGHT, ITS PROGRESS AND INFLUENCE ON FRUIT LOSSES IN NINE TOMATO CULTIVARS' · 1974

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Positive effects of bacterial inoculants on tomato physiology and fruit yield were seen in some cases but were not statistically significant.

    Bacterial Inoculants Mitigating Water Scarcity in Tomato: The Importance of Long-Term in vivo Experiments · 2021

    Opposite direction

192 papers more in this group

See all 201 papers →

application · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

296 papers: 261 positive, 35 negative or no effect

260 papers in the same direction as this claim · 33 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
    Foliar and soil HA treatments positively affected tomato fruit diameter, fruit height and mean fruit weight.

    Foliar and soil fertilization of humic acid affect productivity and quality of tomato · 2006

    Same directionCited by this paper

  2. positive
    Combined EM seed inoculation and spraying increased tomato commercial yield by 35.9%.

    The studies on applying of Effective Microorganisms (EM) and CRF on nutrient contents in leaves and yielding of tomato. · 2014

    Same directionCited by this paper

  3. no effect
    Vermicompost spraying did not affect plant growth, biomass, nutrient allocation, yields, or fruit number.

    Foliar Spraying of Vermicornpost Extracts: Effects on Fruit Quality and Indications of Late-Blight Suppression of Field-Grown Tomatoes · 2006

    Opposite direction

  4. no effect
    Foliar K did not increase fruit yield.

    Processing Tomato Yield and Fruit Quality Improved with Potassium Fertigation · 2005

    Opposite direction

  5. no effect
    Nonmarketable yield was similar with and without sprays in both cultivars.

    Blossom‐end rot and fruit cracking of tomato grown in net‐covered greenhouses in Central Thailand can partly be corrected by calcium and boron sprays · 2009 · compared with without the sprays

    Opposite direction

  6. negative
    Foliar ammonium restricted tomato yield.

    Tomato growth responses to foliar application of ammonium sulfate in hydroponic culture · 2016

    Opposite direction

  7. no effect
    Weekly N and K injection schedule did not affect yield or other characteristics.

    Yield of Trickle-irrigated Tomatoes as Affected by Time of N and K Application · 1990

    Opposite direction

  8. no effect
    Tomato seed soaking at 0 to 1000 mg·L –1 paclobutrazol did not reduce average fruit weight or diameter.

    Effects of Soaking Cucumber and Tomato Seeds in Paclobutrazol Solutions on Fruit Weight, Fruit Size, and Paclobutrazol Level in Fruits · 2006

    Opposite direction

287 papers more in this group

See all 296 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.