Abstract
The goal of the project was to provide growers with information on how different management systems affect the crop, its environment and the ecological and economical sustainability of wild blueberry production. A critical issue affecting growers is how to optimize increasingly expensive inputs to achieve economically and environmentally sustainable yields. We conducted a multi-disciplinary large-scale study of four cropping input systems consisting of Organic, Low input, Medium input and High input that provided diverse gradients of capital inputs and potential environmental effects to quantify system effects on yield, fruit quality, pest communities, the environment, and economic effects of inputs. In the 2010 to 2012 cycle, the cropping systems were applied to two fields (n=8 fields), and this was expanded to have each of the cropping systems applied to an additional four fields (n=16 fields) in 2011 to 2013. This paper will discuss the fertility and weed aspects of the study. Leaf and soil samples were taken in the non-bearing years, and weeds and blueberry were evaluated in June and July. There was large variation on variables measured between years and among locations. Leaf nutrient levels were highest at the High input sites with N, P and B much higher and on the Organic input sites leaf nutrient levels for N and P were deficient but Ca was higher. Weed cover was highest in Organic and Low input systems. Yields were highest in the High input system, but with higher costs it was not the most profitable. Data from both years verify trends that the Medium input system was the most profitable. The Low input system was not profitable on most sites. Organic yields were lowest but with higher fruit value were profitable.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf nutrient levels were highest at the High input sites, with N, P and B much higher than under the other systems.
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e1“Leaf nutrient levels were highest at the High input sites with N, P and B much higher”
e2“Organic, Low input, Medium input and High input”
Claim · model-written summary
At the Organic input sites, leaf N and P were deficient.
- Taxon
- wild blueberrye0
- Organ / stage
- leafe3
- Treatment
- Organic input sitese3
- Outcome
- leaf nutrient levelse3
- Direction
- deficiente3
- Qualifier
- N and Pe3
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e3“on the Organic input sites leaf nutrient levels for N and P were deficient but Ca was higher”
Claim · model-written summary
At the Organic input sites, leaf Ca was higher.
- Taxon
- wild blueberrye0
- Treatment
- Organic input sitese3
- Outcome
- Cae3
- Direction
- highere3
- Qualifier
- leaf nutrient levelse3
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e3“on the Organic input sites leaf nutrient levels for N and P were deficient but Ca was higher”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed cover was highest in the Organic and Low input systems.
- Taxon
- wild blueberrye0
- Treatment
- Organic and Low input systemse4
- Interactor
- Weede4weed
- Outcome
- Weed covere4
- Direction
- higheste4
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e4“Weed cover was highest in Organic and Low input systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Yields were highest in the High input system.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e5“Yields were highest in the High input system, but with higher costs it was not the most profitable”
Claim · model-written summary
The High input system was not the most profitable, despite its higher costs.
- Taxon
- wild blueberrye0
- Treatment
- High input systeme5
- Outcome
- profitablee5
- Direction
- not the most profitablee5
- Qualifier
- with higher costse5
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e5“Yields were highest in the High input system, but with higher costs it was not the most profitable”
Claim · model-written summary
The Medium input system was the most profitable in data from both years.
- Taxon
- wild blueberrye0
- Treatment
- Medium input systeme6
- Outcome
- profitablee6
- Direction
- the most profitablee6
- Qualifier
- Data from both yearse6
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e6“Data from both years verify trends that the Medium input system was the most profitable”
Claim · model-written summary
The Low input system was not profitable on most sites.
- Taxon
- wild blueberrye0
- Treatment
- Low input systeme7
- Outcome
- profitablee7
- Direction
- not profitablee7
- Qualifier
- on most sitese7
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e7“The Low input system was not profitable on most sites”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic yields were the lowest of the input systems.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e2“Organic yields were lowest but with higher fruit value were profitable”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic input systems were profitable because of higher fruit value.
- Taxon
- wild blueberrye0
- Treatment
- Organice2
- Outcome
- profitablee2
- Direction
- were profitablee2
- Qualifier
- with higher fruit valuee2
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e2“Organic yields were lowest but with higher fruit value were profitable”
Claim · model-written summary
Variables measured showed large variation between years and among locations.
Verbatim
e0“sustainability of wild blueberry production”
e2“There was large variation on variables measured between years and among locations”
The same questions in other papers
climate site · nutrient: content · VacciniumPositive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
in vitro · yield · VacciniumPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
cultivation system · yield · VacciniumResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.