Paper · 2018 · Australian Journal of Crop Science

Economic viability of lettuce (Lactuca sativa, L.) grown in hydroponic system with different optimized nutrient solutions

Antonio Fernandes Monteiro Filho; Carlos Alberto Vieira de Azevedo; Márcia Rejane de Queiroz Almeida Azevedo; et al.

3
claims
6
verbatim quotes
2
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Hydroponic cultivation is characterized by high initial costs compared with conventional cultivation. This study discusses the economic viability of implementing a hydroponic system for lettuce production with different mineral and organomineral nutrient solutions through simulation. The experimental design was randomized blocks with split plots and three replicates. Plots consisted of eight nutrient solutions: four mineral solutions, with chemical compositions proposed by Bernardes, Castellane and Arajo, Furlani, and Ueda, and four solutions with chemical compositions similar to those previously cited, but modified in the present research with the utilization of biofertilizer in the composition, to produce four organomineral nutrient solutions. Subplots consisted of three varieties of curly lettuce: Vernica, Vanda and Thas. After harvesting, lettuce plants were separately weighed according to the treatments and, from this information, the selling price was determined based on research conducted in major supermarkets in the city of Campina Grande, Paraba, Brazil. The calculation of expenses took into account the effective operating cost, total operating costs and the total production cost. According to the simulation, regardless of the cultivar used, lettuce hydroponic cultivation had higher annual profit, with values of US$ 18,880.00 and 18,730.00, using the mineral nutrient solutions of Furlani and Bernardes, respectively. Among the organomineral nutrient solutions, the Furlani solution when used in the production of the cultivar Vernica led to annual profit of US$ 11,440.00.

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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Hydroponic lettuce with the mineral nutrient solution of Furlani had a simulated annual profit of US$ 18,880.00, higher than the other solutions.

Taxon
lettuceLactuca sativat0
Treatment
mineral nutrient solutions of Furlanie1
Outcome
annual profite1
Direction
highere1
Value
US$ 18,880.00e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Lactuca sativa
Lactuca sativa · Taxonen:User:Geographer · CC BY 1.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“lettuce (Lactuca sativa, L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–50 · show in text ↑
e1

“regardless of the cultivar used, lettuce hydroponic cultivation had higher annual profit, with values of US$ 18,880.00 and 18,730.00, using the mineral nutrient solutions of Furlani and Bernardes, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1238–1447 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

Hydroponic lettuce with the mineral nutrient solution of Bernardes had a simulated annual profit of US$ 18,730.00, higher than the other solutions.

Taxon
lettuceLactuca sativat0
Treatment
mineral nutrient solutions of Furlani and Bernardese1
Outcome
annual profite1
Direction
highere1
Value
18,730.00e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Lactuca sativa
Lactuca sativa · Taxonen:User:Geographer · CC BY 1.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“lettuce (Lactuca sativa, L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–50 · show in text ↑
e1

“regardless of the cultivar used, lettuce hydroponic cultivation had higher annual profit, with values of US$ 18,880.00 and 18,730.00, using the mineral nutrient solutions of Furlani and Bernardes, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1238–1447 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesimulated

Claim · model-written summary

The organomineral Furlani solution with the cultivar Vernica gave a simulated annual profit of US$ 11,440.00, the highest among the organomineral solutions.

Taxon
lettuceLactuca sativat0
Material
Vernicae2
Treatment
Furlani solutione2
Outcome
annual profite2
Direction
higherinferrede2
Value
US$ 11,440.00e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Lactuca sativa
Lactuca sativa · Taxonen:User:Geographer · CC BY 1.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“lettuce (Lactuca sativa, L.)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 22–50 · show in text ↑
e2

“Among the organomineral nutrient solutions, the Furlani solution when used in the production of the cultivar Vernica led to annual profit of US$ 11,440.00”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1449–1603 · show in text ↑

mineral nutrient · yield · Lactuca sativa (garden lettuce)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.