Abstract
Tomato is native to Central and South America. It is a popular and versatile food ranking third in the world’s vegetable production, next to potato and sweet potato and placing itself in first place among the processing crops. A wide range of insects attack tomato and forms major limiting factor in its successful cultivation and in improvement of yield. In addition to pests Viral diseases are also considered as a important factor which causes severe yield losses at most serious level. Vegetable cultivation is becoming more costly due to the increasing use of purchased inputs such as pesticides and fertilizers to sustain production level. These inputs are also a cause for concern due to their deleterious effect on human health and the environment so that the proposed research study was conducted during 2016-17 at Central Research Farm, BCKV. On Tomato (Moula F1 hybrid) on Non chemical Management strategies for control of tomato leaf curl virus. Results revealed that In the six different management systems T6 in which seedlings were grown under net in nursery followed by transplanting was done in poly house was more effective over rest of the treatments. After that T1 in which seedlings were grown under net in nursery followed by installation of yellow sticky trap 15DAT in main field. followed by T2 in which seedlings were grown under net in nursery without sticky trap in main field, T3 in which seedlings were grown in plug trays in nursery followed by yellow sticky trap 15DAT in main field, T4 in which seedlings were grown in plug trays in nursery without yellow sticky trap in main field, T5 control that is without any treatment. The percent disease incidence of leaf curl virus is 0 in T6.Which was followed by T1(18.33%), T2(20.56%), T3(28.33%), T4(39.44%) and control T5(55%).
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
The net nursery followed by poly house transplanting was the most effective system, with zero leaf curl virus incidence.
- Taxon
- Tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- seedlings were grown under net in nursery followed by transplanting was done in poly housee0
- Interactor
- Tomato Leaf Curl VirusTomato leaf curl virust0pathogen
- Outcome
- more effectivee0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
- Comparator
- rest of the treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“T6 in which seedlings were grown under net in nursery followed by transplanting was done in poly house was more effective over rest of the treatments.”
t0“Tomato Leaf Curl Virus”
Claim · model-written summary
T6 had zero percent leaf curl virus incidence.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- T6e0
- Interactor
- leaf curl viruse0pathogen
- Outcome
- disease incidence of leaf curl viruse0
- Value
- 0e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The percent disease incidence of leaf curl virus is 0 in T6.”
t0“Tomato Leaf Curl Virus”
Claim · model-written summary
T1 had 18.33% leaf curl virus incidence.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- T1e0
- Interactor
- leaf curl virust0pathogen
- Outcome
- leaf curl virust0
- Value
- 18.33%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Which was followed by T1(18.33%), T2(20.56%), T3(28.33%), T4(39.44%) and control T5(55%).”
t0“Tomato Leaf Curl Virus”
Claim · model-written summary
T2 had 20.56% leaf curl virus incidence.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- T2e0
- Interactor
- leaf curl virust0pathogen
- Outcome
- leaf curl virust0
- Value
- 20.56%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Which was followed by T1(18.33%), T2(20.56%), T3(28.33%), T4(39.44%) and control T5(55%).”
t0“Tomato Leaf Curl Virus”
Claim · model-written summary
T3 had 28.33% leaf curl virus incidence.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- T3e0
- Interactor
- leaf curl virust0pathogen
- Outcome
- leaf curl virust0
- Value
- 28.33%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Which was followed by T1(18.33%), T2(20.56%), T3(28.33%), T4(39.44%) and control T5(55%).”
t0“Tomato Leaf Curl Virus”
Claim · model-written summary
T4 had 39.44% leaf curl virus incidence.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- T4e0
- Interactor
- leaf curl virust0pathogen
- Outcome
- leaf curl virust0
- Value
- 39.44%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Which was followed by T1(18.33%), T2(20.56%), T3(28.33%), T4(39.44%) and control T5(55%).”
t0“Tomato Leaf Curl Virus”
Claim · model-written summary
Control T5 had 55% leaf curl virus incidence.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- control T5e0
- Interactor
- leaf curl virust0pathogen
- Outcome
- leaf curl virust0
- Value
- 55%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Which was followed by T1(18.33%), T2(20.56%), T3(28.33%), T4(39.44%) and control T5(55%).”
t0“Tomato Leaf Curl Virus”
The same questions in other papers
trap barrier · Tomato leaf curl virus · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
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.