Claim · model-written summary
The same cultivation increased marketable yield of summer squash fruit by about 16 and 15% compared with the control.
- Taxon
- summer squashe5
- Treatment
- FCS, IR= 60% and SSDI treatmente5
- Outcome
- marketable yielde5
- Direction
- increasede5
- Value
- 16 and 15%e5
- Comparator
- control treatment (UCS, IR= 100% and SDI)e5
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingQualifier
Verbatim
e5“This study concluded that the cultivation of summer squash under FCS, IR= 60% and SSDI treatment. could be saved about 42 and 44% of applied irrigation water and increased marketable yield of the summer squash fruit about 16 and 15% for both seasons respectively, compared to that under control treatment (UCS, IR= 100% and SDI)”
Title
Yield Response of Squash "Cucurbita Pepo" to Water Deficit under East Owainat Conditions
Amr Sadik Ebrahim; ali ali Egyptian Journal of Soil Science 2018. doi:10.21608/ejss.2018.2738.1152
Other claims from this paper (6)
- Intervention effect Marketable yield of summer squash fruits was highest under full plastic cover, 100% irrigation and subsurface drip.
- Intervention effect Studied quality parameters of summer squash fruits, except TSS and acidity pH, were highest under full plastic cover, 100% irrigation and subsurface drip.
- Intervention effect Seasonal actual evapotranspiration of summer squash was lowest (100.48 and 98.95 mm) under uncovered soil, 40% irrigation and surface drip.
- Intervention effect Maximum water use efficiency and irrigation water use efficiency of summer squash fruits were 25.27 and 16.38 kg m-3, and 25.59 and 16.52 kg m-3 in the second season, under full plastic cover, 60% irrigation and subsurface drip.
- Intervention effect Yield response factor (Ky) of summer squash fruits was lowest (0.03 and 0.05) under full plastic cover, 90% irrigation and subsurface drip.
- Intervention effect Cultivating summer squash under full plastic cover, 60% irrigation and subsurface drip saved about 42 and 44% of applied irrigation water compared with the control.