Paper · 2006 · AgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA)

Integrated Pest and Disease Management in Tomato: An Economic Analysis

Gajanana, T.M.; Krishna Moorthy, P.N.; Anupama, H.L.; et al.

6
claims
11
verbatim quotes
27
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

The adoption of IPM technology in tomato using African marigold as a trap crop, root dipping of seedlings in Imidacloprid, soil application of neem/pongamia cake, spraying of botanicals like pongamia soap and biopesticide like Ha NPV has been found effective in both insect as well as disease management. The IPM technology has been found economically viable as the yield on IPM farms has been found higher by about 46 per cent, cost of cultivation has been less by about 21 per cent and the net returns have been higher by 119 per cent. The technology can be considered environment-friendly as it uses more of eco-friendly inputs and less of chemicals. The constraints like non-availability of botanicals and bio-pesticides should be addressed on priority basis to make the technology sustainable and more popular.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The tomato IPM technology was effective for insect and disease management.

Treatment
IPM technologye0
Outcome
insect as well as disease managemente0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The adoption of IPM technology in tomato using African marigold as a trap crop, root dipping of seedlings in Imidacloprid, soil application of neem/pongamia cake, spraying of botanicals like pongamia soap and biopesticide like Ha NPV has been found effective in both insect as well as disease management”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–303 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield on IPM farms was about 46 per cent higher.

Treatment
IPM farmse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0
Value
46 per cente0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield on IPM farms has been found higher by about 46 per cent”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 366–427 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–48 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cultivation cost on IPM farms was about 21 per cent lower.

Outcome
cost of cultivatione0
Direction
lesse0
Value
21 per cente0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cost of cultivation has been less by about 21 per cent”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 429–483 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–48 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Net returns on IPM farms were 119 per cent higher.

Outcome
net returnse0
Direction
highere0
Value
119 per cente0

Not reportedTreatmentComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the net returns have been higher by 119 per cent”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 488–536 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–48 · show in text ↑
Observationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The authors considered the tomato IPM technology environment-friendly because it used more eco-friendly inputs and fewer chemicals.

Outcome
environment-friendlye0
Qualifier
more of eco-friendly inputs and less of chemicalse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The technology can be considered environment-friendly as it uses more of eco-friendly inputs and less of chemicals.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 538–653 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–48 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend addressing botanical and biopesticide availability to sustain adoption of tomato IPM.

Outcome
non-availability of botanicals and bio-pesticides should be addressed on priority basise0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The constraints like non-availability of botanicals and bio-pesticides should be addressed on priority basis to make the technology sustainable and more popular.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 654–815 · show in text ↑
t0

“Tomato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 42–48 · show in text ↑

ipm · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

27 papers: 24 positive, 3 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

23 papers more in this group

See all 27 papers →

ipm · control · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 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.