Abstract
A three-season study was conducted to compare drip irrigation to subirrigation (seepage) for polyethylene-mulched and staked tomato production in southwest Florida. Water-table levels and soil-water status were monitored. Tomato plant growth, nutrient levels, yield, and water required for two irrigation methods were measured. Fixed and variable costs for each system were computed. Results indicated that yield and quality of fruit were not significantly different. There was, however, a significant reduction in water required by drip irrigation, which averaged 50% of pan evaporation. Reduction in pumping costs compensated to some extent for the additional cost of the drip irrigation system. The seasonal additional cost for drip irrigation (excluding labor) was $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1).
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato fruit yield and quality did not differ significantly between irrigation methods.
- Taxon
- Tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- Drip Irrigationt0
- Outcome
- yield and quality of fruite0
- Direction
- not significantly differente0
- Comparator
- Subirrigationt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Comparison of Drip Irrigation to Subirrigation for Tomato Production in Southwest Florida”
e0“Results indicated that yield and quality of fruit were not significantly different.”
Claim · model-written summary
Drip irrigation significantly reduced water required compared with subirrigation.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- drip irrigatione0
- Outcome
- water requirede0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 50% of pan evaporatione0
- Comparator
- Subirrigationt0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Comparison of Drip Irrigation to Subirrigation for Tomato Production in Southwest Florida”
e0“There was, however, a significant reduction in water required by drip irrigation, which averaged 50% of pan evaporation.”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced pumping costs partially compensated for the extra cost of drip irrigation.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- pumping costse0
- Direction
- Reductione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Comparison of Drip Irrigation to Subirrigation for Tomato Production in Southwest Florida”
e0“Reduction in pumping costs compensated to some extent for the additional cost of the drip irrigation system.”
Claim · model-written summary
Seasonal additional cost of drip irrigation excluding labor was $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1).
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- drip irrigatione0
- Outcome
- seasonal additional coste0
- Value
- $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1)e0
- Qualifier
- excluding labore0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Comparison of Drip Irrigation to Subirrigation for Tomato Production in Southwest Florida”
e0“The seasonal additional cost for drip irrigation (excluding labor) was $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1).”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: general · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 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.