Abstract
Rose plants (Rosa hybrida L. ‘Asami Red’) were grown hydroponically at 25°C in a 12-h day and 20°C in 12-h night cycle. The preharvest relative humidity (RH) was set at constant 60% or 85% for a constant humidity experiment, and 60 (day) /85 (night) % or 85 (day) /60 (night) % for a altered humidity experiment. The cut flower yield was greater at the constant high RH condition of 85% than at the constant low RH of 60%. Cut flowers grown at 85% RH had larger stomata in the dark than those at 60% RH. The cut roses grown at 85% showed high stomatal conductance even in the dark and poorly responded to light-dark alternation, resulting in increased transpiration and consequent decreased vase life. In altered humidity experiment, the cut flower yield was higher at 85/60% RH than at 60/85% RH. Stomatal size, responses of stomata to light-dark alternation, daily transpiration and vase life of cut flowers did not differ significantly between these two RH treatments and were almost similar to those of the roses grown at constant 60% RH. Cyclic control of day-night RH is an effective means to achieve both high yield and long vase life of cut roses.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Constant 85% RH increased cut flower yield versus 60% RH.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“The cut flower yield was greater at the constant high RH condition of 85% than at the constant low RH of 60%”
Claim · model-written summary
Roses grown at 85% RH had larger stomata in darkness than those at 60%.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“Cut flowers grown at 85% RH had larger stomata in the dark than those at 60% RH”
Claim · model-written summary
Roses grown at 85% RH retained high dark stomatal conductance.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“The cut roses grown at 85% showed high stomatal conductance even in the dark”
Claim · model-written summary
Roses grown at 85% RH responded poorly to light-dark alternation.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“The cut roses grown at 85% showed high stomatal conductance even in the dark and poorly responded to light-dark alternation”
Claim · model-written summary
Roses grown at 85% RH had increased transpiration.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“resulting in increased transpiration and consequent decreased vase life”
e2“The cut roses grown at 85%”
Claim · model-written summary
Roses grown at 85% RH had decreased vase life.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“resulting in increased transpiration and consequent decreased vase life”
e2“The cut roses grown at 85%”
Claim · model-written summary
Day/night RH of 85/60% produced higher cut flower yield than 60/85%.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“the cut flower yield was higher at 85/60% RH than at 60/85% RH”
Claim · model-written summary
Stomatal size did not differ significantly between altered humidity treatments.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“Stomatal size, responses of stomata to light-dark alternation, daily transpiration and vase life of cut flowers did not differ significantly between these two RH treatments”
e2“85/60% RH than at 60/85% RH”
Claim · model-written summary
Stomatal light-dark responses did not differ significantly between altered humidity treatments.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“Stomatal size, responses of stomata to light-dark alternation, daily transpiration and vase life of cut flowers did not differ significantly between these two RH treatments”
e2“85/60% RH than at 60/85% RH”
Claim · model-written summary
Daily transpiration did not differ significantly between altered humidity treatments.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“Stomatal size, responses of stomata to light-dark alternation, daily transpiration and vase life of cut flowers did not differ significantly between these two RH treatments”
e2“85/60% RH than at 60/85% RH”
Claim · model-written summary
Vase life did not differ significantly between altered humidity treatments.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“Stomatal size, responses of stomata to light-dark alternation, daily transpiration and vase life of cut flowers did not differ significantly between these two RH treatments”
e2“85/60% RH than at 60/85% RH”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend cyclic day-night humidity control to achieve high rose yield and long vase life.
Verbatim
e0“Rose plants”
e1“Cyclic control of day-night RH is an effective means to achieve both high yield and long vase life of cut roses”
The same questions in other papers
humidity · physiology: gas exchange · RosaPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- negative
humidity · quality: postharvest · RosaPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
6 papers more in this group
See all 10 papers →humidity · growth · RosaResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
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.