Abstract
Two field experiments were designed in a strip- plot with four replications were conducted in the Farm of Tag El-Ezz Research Station (latitude of 30.560 N and longitude of 31.350 E), Dakahlia Governorate during 2012/2013 and 2013/2014 seasons to study the effect of four plant spatial distributions and irrigation intervals on yield and quality of sugar beet preceded by rice crop. The present work included twelve treatments represent the combinations between four plant distribution patterns (D1: planting on one side of ridges of 50-cm, D2: planting on both sides of ridges of 50-cm width, D3:planting on both sides of beds of 100-cm width and D4: planting three rows on beds of 150-cm width, with hill spacing of 20 cm in case of D1 and D3 and D4 as well as 40 cm in case of D2) and three irrigation intervals [irrigation every 25 days (R1), 35 days (R2) and 45 days (R1)]. The obtained results revealed that plant distribution patterns significantly influenced every studied traits in both seasons, except purity % in the 1st season. The highest values of all studied characters resulted from D3, while the maximum percentages of TSS, sucrose and purity resulted from D1 in both seasons. Applying D3 increased root yield by 21.7, 11.5 and 6.2 % t/fad in the 1st season, corresponding to 18.2, 10.4 and 4.2% t/fad in the 2nd one as compared with D1, D2 and D4, respectively. Irrigation intervals had a significant effect on all studied characters except purity% in both seasons. The highest values of all studied characters produced from R2 treatment, while the highest values of TSS%, sucrose% and purity% were recorded by R1. Applying R2 increased root yield by 3.9 and 8.2% t/fad in the 1st season and 4.9 and 9.3% t/fad in the 2nd one compared with R1 and R3, respectively. Planting on two sides of beds of 100-cm width and 20 cm between hills and irrigation every 35-days recorded the highest productivity and quality of sugar beet under the environmental conditions of North Delta.
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 17
Claim · model-written summary
Plant distribution patterns significantly affected the studied sugar beet traits in both seasons, except purity in the first season.
- Taxon
- sugar beet
Beta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0 - Treatment
- plant distribution patternse0
- Outcome
- every studied traitse0
- Qualifier
- except purity % in the 1st seasone0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“plant distribution patterns significantly influenced every studied traits in both seasons, except purity % in the 1st season.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 gave the highest values of the studied sugar beet characters.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D3e0
- Outcome
- all studied characterse0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest values of all studied characters resulted from D3”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D1 gave maximum TSS, sucrose and purity percentages in both seasons.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D1e0
- Outcome
- percentages of TSS, sucrose and puritye0
- Direction
- maximume0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the maximum percentages of TSS, sucrose and purity resulted from D1 in both seasons.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 increased first-season root yield by 21.7% relative to D1.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D3e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 21.7e0
- Qualifier
- 1st seasone0
- Comparator
- D1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying D3 increased root yield by 21.7, 11.5 and 6.2 % t/fad in the 1st season, corresponding to 18.2, 10.4 and 4.2% t/fad in the 2nd one as compared with D1, D2 and D4, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 increased first-season root yield by 11.5% relative to D2.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D3e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 11.5e0
- Qualifier
- 1st seasone0
- Comparator
- D2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying D3 increased root yield by 21.7, 11.5 and 6.2 % t/fad in the 1st season, corresponding to 18.2, 10.4 and 4.2% t/fad in the 2nd one as compared with D1, D2 and D4, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 increased first-season root yield by 6.2% relative to D4.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D3e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 6.2 % t/fade0
- Qualifier
- 1st seasone0
- Comparator
- D4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying D3 increased root yield by 21.7, 11.5 and 6.2 % t/fad in the 1st season, corresponding to 18.2, 10.4 and 4.2% t/fad in the 2nd one as compared with D1, D2 and D4, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 increased second-season root yield by 18.2% relative to D1.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D3e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 18.2e0
- Qualifier
- 2nd onee0
- Comparator
- D1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying D3 increased root yield by 21.7, 11.5 and 6.2 % t/fad in the 1st season, corresponding to 18.2, 10.4 and 4.2% t/fad in the 2nd one as compared with D1, D2 and D4, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 increased second-season root yield by 10.4% relative to D2.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D3e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 10.4e0
- Qualifier
- 2nd onee0
- Comparator
- D2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying D3 increased root yield by 21.7, 11.5 and 6.2 % t/fad in the 1st season, corresponding to 18.2, 10.4 and 4.2% t/fad in the 2nd one as compared with D1, D2 and D4, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 increased second-season root yield by 4.2% relative to D4.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- D3e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.2% t/fade0
- Qualifier
- 2nd onee0
- Comparator
- D4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying D3 increased root yield by 21.7, 11.5 and 6.2 % t/fad in the 1st season, corresponding to 18.2, 10.4 and 4.2% t/fad in the 2nd one as compared with D1, D2 and D4, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation intervals significantly affected all studied sugar beet characters except purity in both seasons.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- Irrigation intervalse0
- Outcome
- all studied characterse0
- Qualifier
- except purity% in both seasonse0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Irrigation intervals had a significant effect on all studied characters except purity% in both seasons.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
R2 produced the highest values of the studied sugar beet characters.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- R2 treatmente0
- Outcome
- all studied characterse0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The highest values of all studied characters produced from R2 treatment”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
R1 gave the highest TSS, sucrose and purity percentages.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- R1e0
- Outcome
- TSS%, sucrose% and purity%e0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the highest values of TSS%, sucrose% and purity% were recorded by R1.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
R2 increased root yield by 3.9% relative to R1 in the first season.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- R2e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 3.9e0
- Qualifier
- 1st seasone0
- Comparator
- R1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying R2 increased root yield by 3.9 and 8.2% t/fad in the 1st season and 4.9 and 9.3% t/fad in the 2nd one compared with R1 and R3, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
R2 increased root yield by 8.2% relative to R3 in the first season.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- R2e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 8.2% t/fade0
- Qualifier
- 1st seasone0
- Comparator
- R3e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying R2 increased root yield by 3.9 and 8.2% t/fad in the 1st season and 4.9 and 9.3% t/fad in the 2nd one compared with R1 and R3, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
R2 increased root yield by 4.9% relative to R1 in the second season.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- R2e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.9e0
- Qualifier
- 2nd onee0
- Comparator
- R1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying R2 increased root yield by 3.9 and 8.2% t/fad in the 1st season and 4.9 and 9.3% t/fad in the 2nd one compared with R1 and R3, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
R2 increased root yield by 9.3% relative to R3 in the second season.
- Taxon
- Sugar BeetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarist0
- Treatment
- R2e0
- Outcome
- root yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 9.3% t/fade0
- Qualifier
- 2nd onee0
- Comparator
- R3e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Applying R2 increased root yield by 3.9 and 8.2% t/fad in the 1st season and 4.9 and 9.3% t/fad in the 2nd one compared with R1 and R3, respectively.”
t0“Sugar Beet”
Claim · model-written summary
D3 planting combined with irrigation every 35 days gave the highest sugar beet productivity and quality in the North Delta.
- Taxon
- sugar beetBeta vulgaris subsp. vulgarise0
- Treatment
- Planting on two sides of beds of 100-cm width and 20 cm between hills and irrigation every 35-dayse0
- Outcome
- productivity and qualitye0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Setting
- North Deltae0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Planting on two sides of beds of 100-cm width and 20 cm between hills and irrigation every 35-days recorded the highest productivity and quality of sugar beet under the environmental conditions of North Delta.”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: general · Beta vulgaris (beet)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 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.