Paper · 1991 · HortScience

EFFECTS OF GROUND COVER, PLANTING METHOD AND IRRIGATION LEVELS ON CANTALOUPE PRODUCTION

Robert Stubblefield; Robert Wiedenfeld

12
claims
27
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality. Transplanting vs. direct seeding enhanced early vine growth with earlier yields, although direct seeding later caught up resulting in comparable final cumulative yields. Black polyethylene mulch also improved earliness but at the loser irrigation rate total yields were reduced due to deflection of rainfall by the mulch. Irrigation at .1, .3, .5, .7 and .9 times pan evaporation had little effect on final cumulative yields with exception to the .1 and .3 rates. Melon sugar content was highest for transplants with direct seeded melons becoming comparable only at mid to final harvest. The combined practices of transplanting and black polyethylene mulch resulted in a 14 day earliness advantage over the treatments that were direct seeded on bare soil although final yields were unaffected. No appreciable increase in soil salinity were found as a result of drip irrigation usage.

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 12

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transplanting enhanced early vine growth of cantaloupe compared with direct seeding.

Treatment
Transplantinge2
Outcome
early vine growthe2
Direction
enhancede2
Comparator
direct seedinge2
Setting
south Texase1

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e2

“Transplanting vs. direct seeding enhanced early vine growth with earlier yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 187–266 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transplanting gave earlier cantaloupe yields than direct seeding.

Treatment
Transplantinge2
Outcome
yieldse2
Direction
earliere2
Comparator
direct seedinge2

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e2

“Transplanting vs. direct seeding enhanced early vine growth with earlier yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 187–266 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Direct-seeded cantaloupe caught up with transplants, giving comparable final cumulative yields.

Treatment
direct seedinge3
Outcome
final cumulative yieldse3
Direction
comparablee3
Comparator
Transplantinge2

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e2

“Transplanting vs. direct seeding enhanced early vine growth with earlier yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 187–266 · show in text ↑
e3

“direct seeding later caught up resulting in comparable final cumulative yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 277–355 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Black polyethylene mulch improved earliness of cantaloupe.

Treatment
Black polyethylene mulche4
Outcome
earlinesse4
Direction
improvede4

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e4

“Black polyethylene mulch also improved earliness”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 357–405 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Black polyethylene mulch reduced total cantaloupe yields at the lower irrigation rate, because the mulch deflected rainfall.

Treatment
Black polyethylene mulche5
Outcome
total yieldse5
Direction
reducede5
Qualifier
due to deflection of rainfall by the mulche5

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e5

“Black polyethylene mulch also improved earliness but at the loser irrigation rate total yields were reduced due to deflection of rainfall by the mulch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 357–507 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drip irrigation at .5, .7 and .9 times pan evaporation had little effect on final cumulative cantaloupe yields.

Treatment
.5, .7 and .9 times pan evaporatione6
Outcome
final cumulative yieldse6
Direction
little effecte6

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e6

“Irrigation at .1, .3, .5, .7 and .9 times pan evaporation had little effect on final cumulative yields with exception to the .1 and .3 rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 509–649 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drip irrigation at .1 and .3 times pan evaporation reduced final cumulative cantaloupe yields.

Treatment
.1 and .3 ratese6
Outcome
final cumulative yieldse6
Direction
decreaseinferrede6

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e6

“Irrigation at .1, .3, .5, .7 and .9 times pan evaporation had little effect on final cumulative yields with exception to the .1 and .3 rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 509–649 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Transplants had the highest melon sugar content.

Treatment
transplantse7
Outcome
Melon sugar contente7
Direction
higheste7
Comparator
direct seeded melonse3

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e7

“Melon sugar content was highest for transplants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 651–698 · show in text ↑
e3

“direct seeded melons becoming comparable only at mid to final harvest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 704–773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Direct-seeded melon sugar content became comparable to transplants only at mid to final harvest.

Treatment
direct seeded melonse3
Outcome
Melon sugar contente7
Direction
comparablee3
Qualifier
only at mid to final harveste3
Comparator
transplantse7

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e7

“Melon sugar content was highest for transplants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 651–698 · show in text ↑
e3

“direct seeded melons becoming comparable only at mid to final harvest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 704–773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined transplanting and black polyethylene mulch gave cantaloupe a 14-day earliness advantage over direct seeding on bare soil.

Treatment
combined practices of transplanting and black polyethylene mulche3
Outcome
earlinesse3
Direction
advantagee3
Value
14 daye3
Comparator
direct seeded on bare soile3

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e3

“The combined practices of transplanting and black polyethylene mulch resulted in a 14 day earliness advantage over the treatments that were direct seeded on bare soil although final yields were unaffected”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 775–979 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Combined transplanting and black polyethylene mulch did not change final cantaloupe yield relative to direct seeding on bare soil.

Treatment
combined practices of transplanting and black polyethylene mulche3
Outcome
final yieldse3
Direction
unaffectede3
Comparator
direct seeded on bare soile3

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e3

“The combined practices of transplanting and black polyethylene mulch resulted in a 14 day earliness advantage over the treatments that were direct seeded on bare soil although final yields were unaffected”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 775–979 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Drip irrigation caused no appreciable increase in soil salinity under cantaloupe.

Treatment
drip irrigation usagee3
Outcome
soil salinitye3
Direction
No appreciable increasee3

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis melo var. cantalupo
Cucumis melo var. cantalupo · TaxonRasbak at Dutch Wikipedia · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e1

“A field study was conducted in south Texas in the spring 1990 to determine the effects of ground cover, planting method and drip irrigation rates on cantaloupe growth, yield and quality”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–185 · show in text ↑
e3

“No appreciable increase in soil salinity were found as a result of drip irrigation usage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 981–1069 · show in text ↑

transplanting · yield · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

20 papers: 17 positive, 3 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

16 papers more in this group

See all 20 papers →

mulching · yield · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Positive and negative results

44 papers: 37 positive, 7 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 37 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

40 papers more in this group

See all 44 papers →

transplanting · phenology · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

transplanting · quality: sugar starch · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

transplanting · growth · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

mulching · phenology · Cucumis melo (muskmelon)Results agree

8 papers: 8 positive, 0 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 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.