Abstract
The present experiment was conducted to clarify the effects of different fertigation systems (drip or sub fertigation) in combination with 2 formulae of nutrient solution (modified Enshi formulation or Shizudai tomato formulation) at EC 4 dS·m−1 on the response of “High soluble solid content tomato” grown in soilless culture systems from September, 2005 to February, 2006. The growth, total yield and size of fruit decreased in the sub fertigation system regardless of the nutrient solution formulation. On the other hand, the soluble solid content was higher in the sub fertigation system. Sub fertigation inhibited water uptake compared to drip fertigation. EC of the medium solution was higher in the sub than drip fertigation system, and higher with the Shizudai than the Enshi formulation. The highest and lowest EC values were 29.6 and 16.1 dS·m−1 in Sub × Shizudai and Drip × Enshi treatment, respectively. The matric potential of medium in the sub fertigation system was higher than that in the drip fertigation system. The proline concentration of leaves taken on November 17 and December 2 was higher in the sub than the drip fertigation system regardless of the nutrient solution formulation. Judging from the above results, growth and yield suppression in the sub fertigation system seems to be mainly caused by salinity stress, not by water stress.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Sub fertigation reduced growth, yield and fruit size across nutrient formulations.
- Taxon
- Tomatoes
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- sub fertigation systeme0
- Outcome
- growth, total yield and size of fruite0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- regardless of the nutrient solution formulatione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth, total yield and size of fruit decreased in the sub fertigation system regardless of the nutrient solution formulation.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Sub fertigation increased fruit soluble solid content.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- sub fertigation systeme0
- Outcome
- soluble solid contente0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the soluble solid content was higher in the sub fertigation system.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Sub fertigation inhibited water uptake relative to drip fertigation.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Sub fertigatione0
- Outcome
- water uptakee0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
- Comparator
- drip fertigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Sub fertigation inhibited water uptake compared to drip fertigation.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Medium EC was higher under sub than drip fertigation.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- sube0
- Outcome
- EC of the medium solutione0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- drip fertigation systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“EC of the medium solution was higher in the sub than drip fertigation system”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Medium EC was higher with Shizudai than Enshi formulation.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Shizudaie0
- Outcome
- ECe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- Enshi formulatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“EC of the medium solution was higher in the sub than drip fertigation system, and higher with the Shizudai than the Enshi formulation.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Sub × Shizudai had the highest medium EC at 29.6 dS·m−1.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Sub × Shizudaie0
- Outcome
- higheste0
- Value
- 29.6e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest and lowest EC values were 29.6 and 16.1 dS·m−1 in Sub × Shizudai and Drip × Enshi treatment, respectively.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Drip × Enshi had the lowest medium EC at 16.1 dS·m−1.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Drip × Enshie0
- Outcome
- loweste0
- Value
- 16.1 dS·m−1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest and lowest EC values were 29.6 and 16.1 dS·m−1 in Sub × Shizudai and Drip × Enshi treatment, respectively.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Sub fertigation raised medium matric potential relative to drip fertigation.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- sub fertigation systeme0
- Outcome
- matric potential of mediume0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- drip fertigation systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The matric potential of medium in the sub fertigation system was higher than that in the drip fertigation system.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf proline concentration was higher with sub than drip fertigation on the two sampling dates.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- sube0
- Outcome
- proline concentration of leavese0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- November 17 and December 2e0
- Comparator
- drip fertigation systeme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The proline concentration of leaves taken on November 17 and December 2 was higher in the sub than the drip fertigation system regardless of the nutrient solution formulation.”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors attributed growth and yield suppression under sub fertigation mainly to salinity stress.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- sub fertigation systeme0
- Outcome
- growth and yield suppressione0
- Qualifier
- salinity stress, not by water stresse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“growth and yield suppression in the sub fertigation system seems to be mainly caused by salinity stress, not by water stress.”
t0“Tomatoes”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · physiology: water · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 33 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
37 papers more in this group
See all 41 papers →fertilization · molecular: metabolites · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
106 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
123 papers more in this group
See all 127 papers →fertilization · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
127 papers in the same direction as this paper · 850 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
974 papers more in this group
See all 978 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.