Abstract
ABSTRACT The effects of saline and non‐saline irrigation water on the growth, plant water uptake, water content and yield of tomato ( Solanum esculentum Mill. cv Floradade) were evaluated using drip and furrow irrigation. At all growth stages, leaf area and plant dry weight (biomass) were higher under drip irrigation than under furrow irrigation for both saline and non‐saline water. Saline water reduced both plant leaf area and dry weight and the reduction was more pronounced when furrow rather than drip irrigation was used. In addition, the width of the area occupied by roots and their dry weight were higher in drip than furrow‐irrigated plants. However, roots of furrow‐irrigated plants were deeper than those of drip‐irrigated plants. In drip‐irrigated plants, root activity in the wetted root zone enhanced soil moisture depletion (water uptake) and hence resulted in higher plant water content, even in plants irrigated with saline water (up to 80 days after transplanting, “DAT”). Water use efficiency, estimated as the amount of water added per unit of dry weight produced, was higher with drip irrigation than furrow irrigation, particularly when saline water was used (until 80 DAT). Fruit ripened earlier on drip irrigated‐plants than on furrow‐irrigated ones and the total yield was higher with drip than with furrow irrigation. Saline water reduced both total and early yield, particularly when applied by furrow. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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
Drip irrigation raised tomato leaf area and biomass relative to furrow irrigation at all stages.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume1 - Treatment
- drip irrigatione0
- Outcome
- leaf area and plant dry weight (biomass)e0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- furrow irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“leaf area and plant dry weight (biomass) were higher under drip irrigation than under furrow irrigation for both saline and non‐saline water”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water reduced tomato leaf area and dry weight, especially under furrow irrigation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- Saline watere0
- Outcome
- plant leaf area and dry weighte0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- drip irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Saline water reduced both plant leaf area and dry weight and the reduction was more pronounced when furrow rather than drip irrigation was used”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Drip irrigation increased root spread and dry weight compared with furrow irrigation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- dripe0
- Outcome
- width of the area occupied by roots and their dry weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- furrow‐irrigated plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the width of the area occupied by roots and their dry weight were higher in drip than furrow‐irrigated plants”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Furrow irrigation produced deeper roots than drip irrigation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- furrow‐irrigatede0
- Outcome
- rootse0
- Direction
- deepere0
- Comparator
- drip‐irrigated plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“roots of furrow‐irrigated plants were deeper than those of drip‐irrigated plants”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Drip-irrigated plants had greater soil moisture uptake and water content through 80 days after transplanting, including under saline water.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- saline watere0
- Outcome
- soil moisture depletion (water uptake)e0
- Direction
- enhancede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“root activity in the wetted root zone enhanced soil moisture depletion (water uptake) and hence resulted in higher plant water content, even in plants irrigated with saline water (up to 80 days after transplanting, “DAT”)”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Drip irrigation increased water use efficiency relative to furrow irrigation, especially with saline water through 80 DAT.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- drip irrigatione0
- Outcome
- Water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- furrow irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water use efficiency, estimated as the amount of water added per unit of dry weight produced, was higher with drip irrigation than furrow irrigation, particularly when saline water was used (until 80 DAT)”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit ripened earlier with drip than furrow irrigation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- drip irrigated‐plantse0
- Outcome
- Fruit ripenede0
- Direction
- earliere0
- Comparator
- furrow‐irrigated onese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fruit ripened earlier on drip irrigated‐plants than on furrow‐irrigated ones”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Total tomato yield was higher with drip than furrow irrigation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- dripe0
- Outcome
- total yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- furrow irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the total yield was higher with drip than with furrow irrigation”
e1“yield of tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Saline water reduced total and early yield, especially when furrow applied.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- Saline watere0
- Outcome
- total and early yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Saline water reduced both total and early yield, particularly when applied by furrow”
e1“yield of tomato”
The same questions in other papers
salinity · physiology: water · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 36 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- negative
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
116 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
143 papers more in this group
See all 147 papers →salinity · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
141 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
156 papers more in this group
See all 160 papers →irrigation · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
105 papers in the same direction as this paper · 67 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
171 papers more in this group
See all 175 papers →salinity · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
260 papers in the same direction as this paper · 39 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
296 papers more in this group
See all 300 papers →irrigation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
238 papers in the same direction as this paper · 98 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
340 papers more in this group
See all 344 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.