Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Plant mulches were effective in controlling weed growth and infestation by Colorado potato beetle.

A claim from EVALUATION OF MULCHES IN FIELD-GROWN FRESH-MARKET TOMATOES · 1992

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant mulches were effective in controlling weed growth and infestation by Colorado potato beetle.

Taxon
TOMATOESt0
Treatment
Plant mulchese3
Interactor
weedse3weed
Second interactor
Colorado potato beetleLeptinotarsa decemlineatae3pest
Outcome
growth of weeds and infestation by Colorado potato beetlee3
Direction
effectivee3

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

Leptinotarsa decemlineata
Leptinotarsa decemlineata · Second interactorScott Bauer, USDA ARS · Public domain · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“FIELD-GROWN FRESH-MARKET TOMATOES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 25–58
e3

“Plant mulches were effective in controlling growth of weeds and infestation by Colorado potato beetle”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 667–768

Title

EVALUATION OF MULCHES IN FIELD-GROWN FRESH-MARKET TOMATOES

Aref A. Abdul-Baki; John R. Teasdale HortScience 1992. doi:10.21273/hortsci.27.6.622a

Other claims from this paper (5)

Record rev-a3c091439e09b8ea6c3ddbcd2003a01ea7761631a583a1f44333773f120fce6a · schema claims-v0.9 · position 6 in the model’s answer

mulching · weed · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

55 papers: 49 positive, 6 negative or no effect

48 papers in the same direction as this claim · 2 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
    Organic mulches controlled weeds less efficiently than metribuzin.

    The Effect of Organic Mulches and Metribuzin on Weed Control and Yield of Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) · 2018 · compared with metribuzin

    Opposite direction

  2. negative
    All mulch treatments controlled weeds less efficiently than metribuzin.

    The effect of non-living organic mulches and metribuzin on weed control and compare the performance of tomato yield by using Gompertz and logistic equations · 2018 · compared with metribuzin

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    The VIF mulch was not effective in increasing weed control over LDPE mulch.

    Brassicaceae Cover-Crop Effects on Weed Management in Plasticulture Tomato · 2014 · compared with LDPE mulch

    No difference from an alternative

  4. no effect
    Solarization alone did not outperform farmer practice for weed growth.

    Weed control in squash and tomato fields by soil solarization in the Jordan Valley · 1991 · compared with farmer‐practice

    No difference from an alternative

  5. no effect
    VIF mulch did not improve weed control over LDPE.

    Allyl Isothiocyanate as a Methyl Bromide Alternative for Weed Management in Polyethylene-Mulched Tomato · 2012 · compared with LDPE mulch

    No difference from an alternative

  6. no effect
    VIF mulch was no more effective than LDPE mulch at increasing weed control or improving marketable yield of tomato in either year.

    Comparison of the Herbicidal Activity of Phenyl Isothiocyanate with Methyl Bromide in Polyethylene-Mulched Tomato · 2012 · compared with LDPE mulch

    No difference from an alternative

  7. positive
    Mulching materials controlled most weed species.

    Effect of Biodegradable Mulch Materials on Weed Control in Processing Tomatoes · 2010

    Same direction

  8. positive
    Cover-crop mulch suppressed weeds as well as herbicide plots.

    A Comparison of Four Processing Tomato Production Systems Differing in Cover Crop and Chemical Inputs · 1996 · compared with herbicide plots

    Same direction

46 papers more in this group

See all 55 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.