Paper · 2009

Techniques of Tobacco Micro-sprinkler Irrigation and Effectiveness of Application

Tao Liang

7
claims
23
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

The significance of tobacco water-saving irrigation and the technical aspects of tobacco micro-sprinkler irrigation were introduced in the paper.Multiple trials were set up in Henan tobacco growing areas to investigate the effect of different micro-sprinkling amount on the economic characteristics and water production rate comparing with non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigation.The results showed that micro-sprinkler irrigation had significant water-saving,yield and quality-increasing effects.On the drought conditions during root spreading and rapid growing stages,irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each time promoted plant growth,increased tobacco yield by 43.0%-65.6%,and increased production value by 70.7%-103.4%;the water production rate increased 15%-20% compared with traditional furrow irrigation,and the irrigation water increasing rate increased more than 200%.Micro-sprinkler irrigation has great potential for large scale application.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Micro-sprinkler irrigation (2 times, 24-36 mm each) under drought during root spreading and rapid growth stages increased tobacco yield by 43.0%-65.6% compared with non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigation.

Treatment
irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each timee0
Outcome
tobacco yielde2
Direction
increasede2
Value
43.0%-65.6%e2
Comparator
non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigatione1

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

Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana tabacum · TaxonJom / Joachim Müllerchen · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tobacco”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–21 · show in text ↑
e0

“irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 579–641 · show in text ↑
e1

“comparing with non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 325–388 · show in text ↑
e2

“increased tobacco yield by 43.0%-65.6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 664–702 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Micro-sprinkler irrigation (2 times, 24-36 mm each) increased tobacco production value by 70.7%-103.4% compared with non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigation.

Treatment
irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each timee0
Outcome
production valuee2
Direction
increasede2
Value
70.7%-103.4%e2
Comparator
non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigatione1

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

Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana tabacum · TaxonJom / Joachim Müllerchen · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tobacco”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–21 · show in text ↑
e0

“irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 579–641 · show in text ↑
e1

“comparing with non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 325–388 · show in text ↑
e2

“increased production value by 70.7%-103.4%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 707–749 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Micro-sprinkler irrigation promoted tobacco plant growth under drought during root spreading and rapid growing stages.

Treatment
irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each timee0
Outcome
plant growthe2
Direction
promotede2
Comparator
non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigatione1

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

Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana tabacum · TaxonJom / Joachim Müllerchen · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tobacco”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–21 · show in text ↑
e0

“irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 579–641 · show in text ↑
e1

“comparing with non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 325–388 · show in text ↑
e2

“promoted plant growth”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 642–663 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Tobacco water production rate rose by 15%-20% with micro-sprinkler irrigation compared with traditional furrow irrigation.

Treatment
irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each timee0
Outcome
water production ratee1
Direction
increasede1
Value
15%-20%e1
Comparator
traditional furrow irrigatione1

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

Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana tabacum · TaxonJom / Joachim Müllerchen · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tobacco”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–21 · show in text ↑
e0

“irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 579–641 · show in text ↑
e1

“the water production rate increased 15%-20% compared with traditional furrow irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 750–837 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The irrigation water increasing rate rose by more than 200% with micro-sprinkler irrigation compared with traditional furrow irrigation.

Treatment
irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each timee0
Outcome
irrigation water increasing ratee1
Direction
increasede1
Value
more than 200%e1
Comparator
traditional furrow irrigatione1

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

Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana tabacum · TaxonJom / Joachim Müllerchen · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tobacco”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–21 · show in text ↑
e0

“irrigated 2 times using micro-sprinkler with 24-36mm each time”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 579–641 · show in text ↑
e1

“the water production rate increased 15%-20% compared with traditional furrow irrigation,and the irrigation water increasing rate increased more than 200%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 750–903 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Micro-sprinkler irrigation had significant water-saving, yield-increasing and quality-increasing effects on tobacco.

Treatment
micro-sprinkler irrigatione0
Outcome
water-saving,yield and quality-increasing effectse0
Direction
increasinge0
Comparator
non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigatione1

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

Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana tabacum · TaxonJom / Joachim Müllerchen · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tobacco”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–21 · show in text ↑
e0

“micro-sprinkler irrigation had significant water-saving,yield and quality-increasing effects”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 413–505 · show in text ↑
e1

“comparing with non-irrigation and traditional furrow irrigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 325–388 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that micro-sprinkler irrigation has great potential for large-scale application in tobacco.

Outcome
great potential for large scale applicatione0

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

Nicotiana tabacum
Nicotiana tabacum · TaxonJom / Joachim Müllerchen · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Tobacco”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 14–21 · show in text ↑
e0

“Micro-sprinkler irrigation has great potential for large scale application”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 904–978 · show in text ↑

irrigation · physiology: water · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

irrigation · growth · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 16 positive, 5 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

irrigation · yield · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results

23 papers: 17 positive, 6 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 papers →

irrigation · quality: general · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Results agree

14 papers: 14 positive, 0 negative or no effect

13 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

10 papers more in this group

See all 14 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.