Abstract
Transplanted tomatoes ( Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. ‘Springset’) kept weed free for 36 days after transplanting, or weeded from the 24th day after transplanting, gave yields equal to those that had been kept weed free throughout the growing season. Conversely, when weeds were allowed to remain in the crop for more than 24 days after transplanting, yields were progressively reduced. Therefore, the ‘critical period’ of weed interference in tomatoes was between 24 and 36 days after transplanting. The yield of tomatoes was reduced significantly when only 5% of the weeds were allowed to remain in the plots longer than 21 days after transplanting. Weed interference appeared to have little, if any, effect on tomato juice quality as measured by color, consistency, and flavor.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Keeping tomatoes weed free for 36 days or weeding from day 24 yielded as much as season-long weed control.
- Taxon
- tomatoes
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Material
- ‘Springset’e0
- Treatment
- kept weed free for 36 days after transplanting, or weeded from the 24th day after transplantinge0
- Interactor
- weedse1weed
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- equale0
- Comparator
- kept weed free throughout the growing seasone0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Transplanted tomatoes ( Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. ‘Springset’) kept weed free for 36 days after transplanting, or weeded from the 24th day after transplanting, gave yields equal to those that had been kept weed free throughout the growing season”
e1“when weeds were allowed to remain in the crop for more than 24 days after transplanting, yields were progressively reduced”
Claim · model-written summary
Weeds remaining more than 24 days progressively reduced tomato yield.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- weeds were allowed to remain in the crop for more than 24 days after transplantinge0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“when weeds were allowed to remain in the crop for more than 24 days after transplanting, yields were progressively reduced”
t0“Tomatoes”
Claim · model-written summary
The critical weed interference period was days 24 to 36 after transplanting.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicume0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- ‘critical period’ of weed interferencee0
- Value
- between 24 and 36 days after transplantinge0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the ‘critical period’ of weed interference in tomatoes was between 24 and 36 days after transplanting”
Claim · model-written summary
Even 5% of weeds remaining beyond 21 days significantly reduced tomato yield.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- only 5% of the weeds were allowed to remain in the plots longer than 21 days after transplantinge0
- Interactor
- weedse0weed
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of tomatoes was reduced significantly when only 5% of the weeds were allowed to remain in the plots longer than 21 days after transplanting”
Claim · model-written summary
Weed interference had little apparent effect on tomato juice color, consistency and flavor.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- Weed interferencee0
- Interactor
- Weede0weed
- Outcome
- tomato juice quality as measured by color, consistency, and flavore0
- Direction
- little, if any, effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Weed interference appeared to have little, if any, effect on tomato juice quality as measured by color, consistency, and flavor”
The same questions in other papers
herbicide · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- no effect
41 papers more in this group
See all 45 papers →transplanting · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 55 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
72 papers more in this group
See all 76 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.