Abstract
Abstract Use of animal by‐products for crop production has the potential to be an economical way for our society to protect the environment and to conserve natural resources. Swine farms are an important source of animal manure production. In this experiment, the effect of swine manure and mineral fertilisation on the mass yield of different parts of the cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.) was studied. Fertilizer treatments were fresh and composted solid fractions of swine manure slurry fertilization (FSF and CSF, respectively) at two different rates (300 and 450 kg N ha−1), mineral fertilization (MF, equivalent to 300 kg N ha−1), and a control (C) without fertilization. All fertilizing scenarios produced a higher biomass yield of the different plant parts analyzed than the control. The aerial total biomass (expressed on both a fresh and dry mass basis) from CSF at 300 kg N ha−1 plots was the greatest. In the first sampling, the leaf biomass production was greater, in general, for the organic fertilization treatments. However, in the second sampling, in most cases, differences were not found in the leaf biomass production between organic and inorganic fertilization. Shoot mass of plants fertilized at 300 kg N ha−1 swine manure was similar to that of the MF plots. The application rate of swine manure did not affect the shoot yield, except in plants with FSF treatment at the first sampling. The fruit production by plants fertilized with FSF and CSF at 300 and 450 kg N ha−1, respectively, was not different from fruit production produced by the MF. The greatest cucumber yield was observed in plots with CSF at 300 kg N ha−1 treatment. The fruit size was smaller in plants fertilised with CSF at 300 kg N ha−1 than in the other fertilization treatments. These plants had the greatest number of fruits. Acknowledgments The authors thank Dr. R. Parkinson for the English revision. This work was supported by the Conselleria Valenciana de Innovación y Competitividad of Spain (Project GV 00‐007‐16).
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
All fertilization scenarios increased cucumber biomass yield relative to the control.
- Taxon
- cucumber
Cucumis sativuse1 - Treatment
- All fertilizing scenariose0
- Outcome
- biomass yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“All fertilizing scenarios produced a higher biomass yield of the different plant parts analyzed than the control”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Composted solid fraction at 300 kg N ha−1 gave the greatest aerial fresh and dry biomass.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- CSF at 300 kg N ha−1e0
- Outcome
- aerial total biomasse0
- Direction
- greateste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The aerial total biomass (expressed on both a fresh and dry mass basis) from CSF at 300 kg N ha−1 plots was the greatest”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
At first sampling, organic fertilization generally gave greater cucumber leaf biomass.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- organic fertilization treatmentse0
- Outcome
- leaf biomass productione0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- In the first samplinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the first sampling, the leaf biomass production was greater, in general, for the organic fertilization treatments”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
At second sampling, cucumber leaf biomass usually did not differ between organic and inorganic fertilization.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- organice0
- Outcome
- leaf biomass productione0
- Direction
- differences were not founde0
- Comparator
- inorganic fertilizatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“in the second sampling, in most cases, differences were not found in the leaf biomass production between organic and inorganic fertilization”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
At 300 kg N ha−1, swine manure gave shoot mass similar to mineral fertilizer.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- 300 kg N ha−1 swine manuree0
- Outcome
- Shoot masse0
- Direction
- similare0
- Comparator
- MF plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shoot mass of plants fertilized at 300 kg N ha−1 swine manure was similar to that of the MF plots”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Swine manure application rate did not affect cucumber shoot yield apart from fresh fraction at first sampling.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- application rate of swine manuree0
- Outcome
- shoot yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
- Qualifier
- except in plants with FSF treatment at the first samplinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The application rate of swine manure did not affect the shoot yield, except in plants with FSF treatment at the first sampling”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fresh swine manure fraction at 300 kg N ha−1 gave fruit production no different from mineral fertilizer.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- FSFe0
- Outcome
- fruit productione0
- Direction
- not differente0
- Comparator
- MFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fruit production by plants fertilized with FSF and CSF at 300 and 450 kg N ha−1, respectively, was not different from fruit production produced by the MF”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Composted swine manure fraction at 450 kg N ha−1 gave fruit production no different from mineral fertilizer.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- CSFe0
- Outcome
- fruit productione0
- Direction
- not differente0
- Comparator
- MFe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fruit production by plants fertilized with FSF and CSF at 300 and 450 kg N ha−1, respectively, was not different from fruit production produced by the MF”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Composted swine manure fraction at 300 kg N ha−1 gave the greatest cucumber yield.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse0
- Treatment
- CSF at 300 kg N ha−1e0
- Outcome
- cucumber yielde0
- Direction
- greateste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The greatest cucumber yield was observed in plots with CSF at 300 kg N ha−1 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Composted fraction at 300 kg N ha−1 produced smaller cucumber fruit than other fertilizer treatments.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- CSF at 300 kg N ha−1e0
- Outcome
- fruit sizee0
- Direction
- smallere0
- Comparator
- other fertilization treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fruit size was smaller in plants fertilised with CSF at 300 kg N ha−1 than in the other fertilization treatments”
e1“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Composted fraction at 300 kg N ha−1 produced the greatest number of cucumber fruits.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse2
- Treatment
- CSF at 300 kg N ha−1e1
- Outcome
- number of fruitse0
- Direction
- greateste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These plants had the greatest number of fruits”
e1“CSF at 300 kg N ha−1 than in the other fertilization treatments”
e2“cucumber plant (Cucumis sativus L.)”
The same questions in other papers
cultivation system · yield · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →nitrogen · yield · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →nitrogen · growth · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 papers →fertilization · yield · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
262 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction · 6 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
284 papers more in this group
See all 288 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.