Abstract
A field experiment was conducted at Aksum Agricultural Research Center Merebleke irrigation testing site for two years, 2014 and 2015 cropping calendar under irrigation condition. The objective of the study was to determine the effect of Inter and intra-row spacing on growth, Yield and fruit characteristics of Melkashola variety of tomato. The trial was laid out in factorial randomized complete block design in three replications. The treatment comprises of twelve treatment combination (20, 30 and 40 cm intra row spacing and 60, 80, 100 and 120 cm inter row spacing). Combined analysis of variance showed that except days to 50% flowering, all traits did not show significant interaction effect. However, main effect of inter and intra row spacing showed significant differences for days to maturity, plant height, number of fruits per plant, fruit weight and marketable fruit yield. The highest number of fruits per plant was found from 40 cm intra row spacing (74) but it is statistically at par with 30 cm intra row spacing (68). Fruit size was significantly affected by intra row spacing; the largest fruit size was recorded from 30 cm intra row spacing (71.1 g) while the smaller size found from 20 cm intra row spacing (67.5 g). However, fruit size didn’t show significant difference for different inter row spacing. The highest marketable yield was obtained from 60 cm inter row spacing (654.60qt ha-1) which is statistically not significant with 80 cm inter row spacing (611.7 qt ha-1). Similarly, the narrow intra row spacing that is, 20cm scored highest marketable yield (651.4 qt ha-1) which is also statistically at par with 30 cm intra row spacing (597.4 qt ha-1). Considering fruit size and marketable yield, 60 cm inter row spacing and 30 cm intra row spacing are appropriate for higher marketable fruit yield and better fruit size in Merebleke wereda. Key words: Inter and intra-row spacing, tomato, Melkasholla, Mrebleke, marketable yield.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Most measured traits had no significant interaction between row spacings.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Outcome
- all traitse0
- Direction
- did not show significant interaction effecte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Combined analysis of variance showed that except days to 50% flowering, all traits did not show significant interaction effect.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Days to 50% flowering was the exception to the nonsignificant interaction result.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- days to 50% floweringe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Combined analysis of variance showed that except days to 50% flowering, all traits did not show significant interaction effect.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Main effects of inter- and intra-row spacing differed significantly for days to maturity.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- inter and intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- days to maturitye0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, main effect of inter and intra row spacing showed significant differences for days to maturity, plant height, number of fruits per plant, fruit weight and marketable fruit yield.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Main effects of inter- and intra-row spacing differed significantly for plant height.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- inter and intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- plant heighte0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, main effect of inter and intra row spacing showed significant differences for days to maturity, plant height, number of fruits per plant, fruit weight and marketable fruit yield.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Main effects of inter- and intra-row spacing differed significantly for number of fruits per plant.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- inter and intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- number of fruits per plante0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, main effect of inter and intra row spacing showed significant differences for days to maturity, plant height, number of fruits per plant, fruit weight and marketable fruit yield.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Main effects of inter- and intra-row spacing differed significantly for fruit weight.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- inter and intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- fruit weighte0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, main effect of inter and intra row spacing showed significant differences for days to maturity, plant height, number of fruits per plant, fruit weight and marketable fruit yield.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Main effects of inter- and intra-row spacing differed significantly for marketable fruit yield.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- inter and intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- marketable fruit yielde0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, main effect of inter and intra row spacing showed significant differences for days to maturity, plant height, number of fruits per plant, fruit weight and marketable fruit yield.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
40 cm intra-row spacing gave 74 fruits per plant, statistically at par with 30 cm spacing and 68 fruits.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 40 cm intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- number of fruits per plante0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 74e0
- Qualifier
- 68e0
- Comparator
- 30 cm intra row spacinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest number of fruits per plant was found from 40 cm intra row spacing (74) but it is statistically at par with 30 cm intra row spacing (68).”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
30 cm intra-row spacing produced the largest fruit size, 71.1 g.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 30 cm intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- fruit sizee0
- Direction
- largeste0
- Value
- 71.1 ge0
- Qualifier
- 67.5 ge0
- Comparator
- 20 cm intra row spacinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fruit size was significantly affected by intra row spacing; the largest fruit size was recorded from 30 cm intra row spacing (71.1 g) while the smaller size found from 20 cm intra row spacing (67.5 g).”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
20 cm intra-row spacing produced smaller fruit, 67.5 g.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 20 cm intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- fruit sizee0
- Direction
- smallere0
- Value
- 67.5 ge0
- Qualifier
- 71.1 ge0
- Comparator
- 30 cm intra row spacinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Fruit size was significantly affected by intra row spacing; the largest fruit size was recorded from 30 cm intra row spacing (71.1 g) while the smaller size found from 20 cm intra row spacing (67.5 g).”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit size did not differ significantly among inter-row spacings.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- different inter row spacinge0
- Outcome
- fruit sizee0
- Direction
- didn’t show significant differencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However, fruit size didn’t show significant difference for different inter row spacing.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
60 cm inter-row spacing gave the highest marketable yield, 654.60qt ha-1, statistically at par with 80 cm spacing.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 60 cm inter row spacinge0
- Outcome
- marketable yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 654.60qt ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 611.7 qt ha-1e0
- Comparator
- 80 cm inter row spacinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest marketable yield was obtained from 60 cm inter row spacing (654.60qt ha-1) which is statistically not significant with 80 cm inter row spacing (611.7 qt ha-1).”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
20cm intra-row spacing gave the highest marketable yield, 651.4 qt ha-1, statistically at par with 30 cm spacing.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 20cme0
- Outcome
- marketable yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 651.4 qt ha-1e0
- Qualifier
- 597.4 qt ha-1e0
- Comparator
- 30 cm intra row spacinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Similarly, the narrow intra row spacing that is, 20cm scored highest marketable yield (651.4 qt ha-1) which is also statistically at par with 30 cm intra row spacing (597.4 qt ha-1).”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend 60 cm inter-row and 30 cm intra-row spacing for yield and fruit size in Merebleke.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 60 cm inter row spacing and 30 cm intra row spacinge0
- Outcome
- higher marketable fruit yield and better fruit sizee0
- Setting
- Merebleke weredae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Considering fruit size and marketable yield, 60 cm inter row spacing and 30 cm intra row spacing are appropriate for higher marketable fruit yield and better fruit size in Merebleke wereda.”
t0“Response of yield and yield components of tomato (Solanum lycopersicon L.)”
The same questions in other papers
density · quality: postharvest · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →density · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
47 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
56 papers more in this group
See all 60 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.