Abstract
In a three year experiment carried out during 1995-1997 in southern Italy, four or eight weeks of soil solarization failed to increase lettuce yields in fields infested with Meloidogyne incognita at Castellaneta (Taranto) and Monteroni (Lecce). At Castellaneta, concomitant application of fenamiphos and four weeks of solarization and fenamiphos after four weeks of solarization increased lettuce yield as did fenamiphos applied at the end of eight weeks of solarization or as single application, just before planting. All combinations of fenamiphos and solarization increased yield of the following crop, cantaloupe, which was also increased by application of 1,3 D in April. All treatments significantly suppressed the root gall index on both crops. At Monteroni, data on both crops, lettuce and tobacco, were erratic and did not provide clear information on yields nor on root gall indices. However, correlations between soil solarization or application of fenamiphos, alone or in combination, and yields or root gall indices clearly showed that soil solarization might be a good practice for the management of root-knot nematodes.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
Four or eight weeks of solarization failed to increase lettuce yield at Castellaneta and Monteroni.
- Taxon
- lettuce
Lactuca sativae0 - Treatment
- four or eight weeks of soil solarizatione0
- Interactor
- Meloidogyne incognita
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogyne incognitae0pest - Outcome
- lettuce yieldse0
- Direction
- failed to increasee0
- Setting
- Castellaneta (Taranto) and Monteroni (Lecce)e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“four or eight weeks of soil solarization failed to increase lettuce yields in fields infested with Meloidogyne incognita at Castellaneta (Taranto) and Monteroni (Lecce)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fenamiphos with or after four weeks of solarization increased lettuce yield at Castellaneta.
- Taxon
- lettuceLactuca sativae0
- Treatment
- fenamiphos and four weeks of solarizatione0
- Outcome
- lettuce yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Setting
- Castellanetae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At Castellaneta, concomitant application of fenamiphos and four weeks of solarization and fenamiphos after four weeks of solarization increased lettuce yield”
Claim · model-written summary
Fenamiphos after eight weeks of solarization increased lettuce yield.
- Treatment
- fenamiphos applied at the end of eight weeks of solarizatione0
Not reportedTaxonComparatorOutcomeDirection
Verbatim
e0“fenamiphos applied at the end of eight weeks of solarization or as single application, just before planting”
Claim · model-written summary
Fenamiphos alone before planting increased lettuce yield.
- Treatment
- single application, just before plantinge0
Not reportedTaxonComparatorOutcomeDirection
Verbatim
e0“fenamiphos applied at the end of eight weeks of solarization or as single application, just before planting”
Claim · model-written summary
All fenamiphos and solarization combinations increased following cantaloupe yield.
- Taxon
- cantaloupe
Cucumis melo var. cantalupoe0 - Treatment
- combinations of fenamiphos and solarizatione0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All combinations of fenamiphos and solarization increased yield of the following crop, cantaloupe”
Claim · model-written summary
Application of 1,3 D increased following cantaloupe yield.
- Taxon
- cantaloupeCucumis melo var. cantalupoe0
- Treatment
- application of 1,3 De0
- Outcome
- cantaloupee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- Aprile0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“cantaloupe, which was also increased by application of 1,3 D in April”
Claim · model-written summary
All treatments suppressed root gall index on both crops.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“All treatments significantly suppressed the root gall index on both crops”
Claim · model-written summary
The Monteroni yield and root gall data were erratic.
- Taxon
- lettuce and tobacco
Nicotiana tabacumLactuca sativae0 - Outcome
- yields nor on root gall indicese0
- Qualifier
- erratice0
- Setting
- Monteronie0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At Monteroni, data on both crops, lettuce and tobacco, were erratic and did not provide clear information on yields nor on root gall indices”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest solarization for management of root-knot nematodes.
- Outcome
- soil solarization might be a good practice for the management of root-knot nematodese0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“soil solarization might be a good practice for the management of root-knot nematodes”
The same questions in other papers
solarization · Meloidogyne incognita · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
solarization · yield · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →solarization · yield · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 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.