Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the growth and flowering of petunia ( Petunia × hybrida ) transplants in response to seven commercial substrates with two water sources (fertigation and clear water irrigation). Seven commercial substrates used were Sunshine #1 Natural & Organic (SS), Metro-Mix 360 (MM), AgriTech (AT), Cornell Peat-Lite Mix B (CB), Jeff’s Organic (JO), LM-18, and LM-111. The experiment was a completely randomized 2 × 7 factorial design with six single-pot replications per treatment. With fertigation, substrate electrical conductivity (EC) decreased over time to 38 days after transplanting (DAT), and then did not further change. The AT substrate EC value was greater than others during the first 38 DAT. With clear water irrigation, substrate EC decreased over time to 31 DAT, and then did not further change. The AT substrate EC value was greater than other substrates during the entire petunia growth period. With fertigation, all substrate pH values were between 6.5 and 7.5 except AT and CB. The AT substrate had the greatest pH ranging from 7.5 to 8.0 during the petunia growth period. The CB substrate exhibited the lowest pH, which was between 5.8 and 6.3. Clear water irrigation had greater substrate pH values than fertigation. There was a substrate and water interaction for calcium (Ca), potassium (K), ammonium-nitrogen (NH 4 + -N), nitrate-nitrogen (NO 3 − -N), and sodium (Na) concentrations in substrate leachate. At 52 DAT, the shoot dry weight (DW), root index (RI), and flower number of petunia grown in AT substrate were greatest among all the substrates, but chlorophyll index (SPAD) was the lowest under either the fertigation or clear water irrigation treatments. The DW and RI of petunia grown in AT substrate were greater when fertigation was used than clear water irrigation, but the water source had no effect on flower number. For SS, MM, CB, JO, LM-18, and LM-111 substrates, fertigation increased petunia DW, RI, and flower number as compared with clear water irrigation, but not SPAD readings.
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
With fertigation, substrate EC decreased over time to 38 DAT and then did not change further.
- Treatment
- fertigatione1
- Outcome
- substrate electrical conductivity (EC)e1
- Direction
- decreasede1
- Qualifier
- then did not further changee1
_flowers_in_Westgate_Gardens%2C_Canterbury.jpg?width=60){kind=small}
PetuniaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_flowers_in_Westgate_Gardens%2C_Canterbury.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e1“With fertigation, substrate electrical conductivity (EC) decreased over time to 38 days after transplanting (DAT), and then did not further change”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
With clear water irrigation, substrate EC decreased over time to 31 DAT and then did not change further.
- Treatment
- clear water irrigatione2
- Outcome
- substrate ECe2
- Direction
- decreasede2
- Qualifier
- then did not further changee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“With clear water irrigation, substrate EC decreased over time to 31 DAT, and then did not further change”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
The AT substrate had greater EC than the other substrates during the first 38 DAT.
- Treatment
- AT substratee3
- Outcome
- EC valuee3
- Direction
- greatere3
- Qualifier
- during the first 38 DATe3
- Comparator
- otherse3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“The AT substrate EC value was greater than others during the first 38 DAT”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
The AT substrate had greater EC than the other substrates during the entire petunia growth period.
- Treatment
- AT substratee4
- Outcome
- EC valuee4
- Direction
- greatere4
- Qualifier
- during the entire petunia growth periode4
- Comparator
- other substratese4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“The AT substrate EC value was greater than other substrates during the entire petunia growth period”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
With fertigation, substrate pH values were between 6.5 and 7.5 for all substrates except AT and CB.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“With fertigation, all substrate pH values were between 6.5 and 7.5 except AT and CB”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
The AT substrate had the greatest pH, ranging from 7.5 to 8.0 during the petunia growth period.
- Treatment
- AT substratee6
- Outcome
- pHe6
- Direction
- greateste6
- Value
- 7.5 to 8.0e6
- Qualifier
- during the petunia growth periode6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“The AT substrate had the greatest pH ranging from 7.5 to 8.0 during the petunia growth period”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
The CB substrate had the lowest pH, between 5.8 and 6.3.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“The CB substrate exhibited the lowest pH, which was between 5.8 and 6.3”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
Clear water irrigation gave greater substrate pH values than fertigation.
- Treatment
- Clear water irrigatione0
- Outcome
- substrate pH valuese0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Comparator
- fertigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Clear water irrigation had greater substrate pH values than fertigation”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
There was a substrate and water interaction for calcium, potassium and sodium concentrations in substrate leachate.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was a substrate and water interaction for calcium (Ca), potassium (K), ammonium-nitrogen (NH 4 + -N), nitrate-nitrogen (NO 3 − -N), and sodium (Na) concentrations in substrate leachate”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
There was a substrate and water interaction for ammonium-nitrogen and nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in substrate leachate.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was a substrate and water interaction for calcium (Ca), potassium (K), ammonium-nitrogen (NH 4 + -N), nitrate-nitrogen (NO 3 − -N), and sodium (Na) concentrations in substrate leachate”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
At 52 DAT, petunia grown in the AT substrate had the greatest shoot dry weight, root index and flower number among all the substrates.
- Treatment
- AT substratee0
- Outcome
- shoot dry weight (DW), root index (RI), and flower numbere0
- Direction
- greateste0
- Qualifier
- At 52 DATe0
- Comparator
- all the substratese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At 52 DAT, the shoot dry weight (DW), root index (RI), and flower number of petunia grown in AT substrate were greatest among all the substrates, but chlorophyll index (SPAD) was the lowest under either the fertigation or clear water irrigation treatments”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
Petunia grown in the AT substrate had the lowest chlorophyll index (SPAD) at 52 DAT under either fertigation or clear water irrigation.
- Treatment
- AT substratee0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll index (SPAD)e0
- Direction
- loweste0
- Qualifier
- under either the fertigation or clear water irrigation treatmentse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At 52 DAT, the shoot dry weight (DW), root index (RI), and flower number of petunia grown in AT substrate were greatest among all the substrates, but chlorophyll index (SPAD) was the lowest under either the fertigation or clear water irrigation treatments”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
Petunia grown in the AT substrate had greater dry weight and root index with fertigation than with clear water irrigation.
- Treatment
- fertigatione0
- Outcome
- DW and RIe0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- grown in AT substratee0
- Comparator
- clear water irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The DW and RI of petunia grown in AT substrate were greater when fertigation was used than clear water irrigation, but the water source had no effect on flower number”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
The water source had no effect on flower number of petunia.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The DW and RI of petunia grown in AT substrate were greater when fertigation was used than clear water irrigation, but the water source had no effect on flower number”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigation increased dry weight, root index and flower number of petunia compared with clear water irrigation in six commercial substrates.
- Treatment
- fertigatione0
- Outcome
- DW, RI, and flower numbere0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- For SS, MM, CB, JO, LM-18, and LM-111 substratese0
- Comparator
- clear water irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For SS, MM, CB, JO, LM-18, and LM-111 substrates, fertigation increased petunia DW, RI, and flower number as compared with clear water irrigation, but not SPAD readings”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigation did not increase SPAD readings of petunia compared with clear water irrigation in six commercial substrates.
- Treatment
- fertigatione0
- Outcome
- SPAD readingse0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
- Qualifier
- For SS, MM, CB, JO, LM-18, and LM-111 substratese0
- Comparator
- clear water irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“For SS, MM, CB, JO, LM-18, and LM-111 substrates, fertigation increased petunia DW, RI, and flower number as compared with clear water irrigation, but not SPAD readings”
t0“Petunia Transplants”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · physiology: pigments · Petunia (petunia)Positive and negative results
6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →growing medium · growth · Petunia (petunia)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →fertilization · growth · Petunia (petunia)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 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.