Paper · 2019 · DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)

Performance of tomato under greenhouse and open field conditions in the trans-Himalayan region of India

Kanwar, M.S.

6
claims
8
verbatim quotes
15
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Production of tomato is limited by harsh climate and a short growing season in the trans-Himalayan Ladakh region of India. The performance of five tomato genotypes was compared under polyhouse and open field conditions. The study revealed that the performance of all tested tomato genotypes is far superior in the polyhouse, as compared to open field conditions, for all the considered characters. ‘Shivalik’ performed best with respect to yield characters followed by ‘Pusa Rohini’ under polyhouse conditions. However, in the open field, ‘Pusa Rohini’ showed the highest values, followed by ‘Shivalik’. Cultivation of tomato under the polyhouse produced 136.12% more yield per ha and 188.93% more fruits per plant compared to open field cultivation. Therefore, tomato cultivation under protected conditions is advised for Ladakh growing conditions, employing specific polyhouse-responsive varieties.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All tested tomato genotypes performed far better in polyhouses for all considered characters.

Treatment
polyhousee0
Outcome
performancee0
Direction
far superiore0
Qualifier
all the considered characterse0
Comparator
open field conditionse0

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

“The study revealed that the performance of all tested tomato genotypes is far superior in the polyhouse, as compared to open field conditions, for all the considered characters.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 220–397 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shivalik performed best for yield characters in the polyhouse, followed by Pusa Rohini.

Material
Shivalike0
Outcome
yield characterse0
Direction
beste0
Comparator
Pusa Rohinie0
Setting
polyhouse conditionse0

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

“‘Shivalik’ performed best with respect to yield characters followed by ‘Pusa Rohini’ under polyhouse conditions.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 398–510 · show in text ↑
t0

“tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–21 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pusa Rohini showed the highest open field values, followed by Shivalik.

Material
Pusa Rohinie0
Outcome
highest valuese0
Direction
higheste0
Comparator
Shivalike0
Setting
open fielde0

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

“However, in the open field, ‘Pusa Rohini’ showed the highest values, followed by ‘Shivalik’.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 511–603 · show in text ↑
t0

“tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 15–21 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

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

Treatment
polyhousee0
Outcome
yield per hae0
Direction
moree0
Value
136.12%e0
Comparator
open field cultivatione0

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

“Cultivation of tomato under the polyhouse produced 136.12% more yield per ha and 188.93% more fruits per plant compared to open field cultivation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 604–750 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Polyhouse cultivation produced 188.93% more fruits per plant than open field cultivation.

Treatment
polyhousee0
Outcome
fruits per plante0
Direction
moree0
Value
188.93%e0
Comparator
open field cultivatione0

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

“Cultivation of tomato under the polyhouse produced 136.12% more yield per ha and 188.93% more fruits per plant compared to open field cultivation.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 604–750 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors advise protected tomato cultivation in Ladakh using responsive varieties.

Outcome
cultivation under protected conditionse0
Qualifier
employing specific polyhouse-responsive varietiese0
Setting
Ladakhe0

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

“Therefore, tomato cultivation under protected conditions is advised for Ladakh growing conditions, employing specific polyhouse-responsive varieties.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 751–900 · show in text ↑

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 paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

20 papers more in this group

See all 24 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.