Paper · 2018

Effect of Potting Media on the Growth Performance of Cherry Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)

V. Q. Thanh; Anh Tu

5
claims
9
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) is a fruit vegetable, and its fruits contain excellent source of vitamins and antioxidants. Soil has been the only potting medium for tomato cultivation until the soilless culture was introduced, coupled with the decline in availability of quality soil. Peat moss and perlite are among the popular soilless media, but they are costly in Malaysia, and the exploitation of peat moss might contribute to greenhouse gas effect. Coco peat and rice husk are more easily available in Malaysia. This study compared the effect of four potting media, peat moss and perlite (3:1), coco peat (1), topsoil (1), and topsoil and rice husk (1:1) on growth performance of cherry tomato. The treatments were arranged in a completely randomised design with seven replicates per treatment. pH, water holding capacity, electrical conductivity and nitrogen content of the potting media were analysed before the experiment. Plant height, leaf number, root shoot ratio, flower number, total number of fruits and fruit sweetness of the plants in peat moss and perlite, topsoil, and topsoil and rice husk were not significantly different from each other. The plants in coco peat did not perform well, and few plants died toward the end of the experiment. Topsoil and rice husk medium could be a good choice as potting medium for tomato in containers in terms of cost and environmental concerns

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Plant height, leaf number, and root shoot ratio did not differ significantly among three media.

Treatment
peat moss and perlite, topsoil, and topsoil and rice huske0
Outcome
Plant height, leaf number, root shoot ratioe0
Direction
not significantly differente0
Comparator
each othere0

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

Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme
Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme · TaxonJS · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Plant height, leaf number, root shoot ratio, flower number, total number of fruits and fruit sweetness of the plants in peat moss and perlite, topsoil, and topsoil and rice husk were not significantly different from each other”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1157 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cherry Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–89 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Flower number, fruit number, and fruit sweetness did not differ significantly among three media.

Treatment
peat moss and perlite, topsoil, and topsoil and rice huske0
Outcome
flower number, total number of fruits and fruit sweetnesse0
Direction
not significantly differente0
Comparator
each othere0

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

Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme
Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme · TaxonJS · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“flower number, total number of fruits and fruit sweetness of the plants in peat moss and perlite, topsoil, and topsoil and rice husk were not significantly different from each other”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 976–1157 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cherry Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–89 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Plants grown in coco peat performed poorly.

Treatment
coco peate0
Outcome
did not perform welle0
Direction
did not perform welle0

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

Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme
Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme · TaxonJS · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The plants in coco peat did not perform well”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1159–1203 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cherry Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–89 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A few coco peat plants died late in the experiment.

Outcome
few plants diede0
Qualifier
toward the end of the experimente0

Not reportedDirection

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

Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme
Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme · TaxonJS · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“few plants died toward the end of the experiment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1209–1257 · show in text ↑
t0

“Cherry Tomato (Solanum lycopersicum)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 53–89 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors propose topsoil and rice husk for container tomato on cost and environmental grounds.

Outcome
Topsoil and rice husk medium could be a good choice as potting mediume0
Qualifier
in containers in terms of cost and environmental concernse0

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

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Topsoil and rice husk medium could be a good choice as potting medium for tomato in containers in terms of cost and environmental concerns”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1259–1397 · show in text ↑

Oryza sativa · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 16 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

Oryza sativa · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

29 papers: 26 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

growing medium · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

141 papers: 112 positive, 29 negative or no effect

28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 112 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

137 papers more in this group

See all 141 papers →

growing medium · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

169 papers: 126 positive, 43 negative or no effect

42 papers in the same direction as this paper · 126 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

165 papers more in this group

See all 169 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.