Paper · 2020 · Water

Effect of Distribution Uniformity and Fertigation Volume on the Bio-Productivity of the Greenhouse Zucchini Crop

Juana I. Contreras; Rafael Baeza; Francisca Alonso; et al.

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
14
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Greenhouse horticultural crops are characterized by high levels of efficiency and productivity of irrigation water and nutrients applied. However, these indices may be affected by poor distribution uniformity of fertigation (DU). Different previous prospective studies show that there is a significant percentage of facilities with a low level of DU. However, there is no precise relationship between DU and the efficiency and productivity of water and fertilizers. This relationship may be affected by different factors, especially by the irrigation dose. The objective of this work was to determine the effect of the distribution uniformity of fertigation and the fertigation volume (FV) on the bio productive parameters and efficiency of water and nutrient use of the zucchini crop. The trial was developed in a greenhouse located in La Mojonera (Almería), on sanded soil. The greenhouse was equipped with an automated fertigation installation. The experimental design was randomized complete blocks with six treatments and three repetitions. The established treatment was a combination of two factors: distribution uniformity and fertigation volume. Three levels of DU were established: 100%, 75% and 50% approximately and two levels of fertigation volume: FV100% and FV70%. Volume of water and nutrients applied, soil matric potential (SMP), yield, biomass and efficiency in the water and nutrients use were determined. The maximum efficiency in the use of water and nutrients was obtained with a DU of 100% or 75% and a fertigation volume of FV70%, but this fertigation volume reduced the bio-productive parameters of the crop such as yield. The maximum yield and biomass were obtained with the volume of fertigation of 100% (FV100%), and with a DU of 100% or 75%. DU50% level reduced all bio-productive parameters, reducing yield by 45%, as well as the water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient efficiency with any level of fertigation.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Water use efficiency was maximum with DU 100% or 75% and FV70%.

Treatment
a DU of 100% or 75% and a fertigation volume of FV70%e0
Outcome
efficiency in the use of watere0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“The maximum efficiency in the use of water and nutrients was obtained with a DU of 100% or 75% and a fertigation volume of FV70%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1425–1553 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nutrient use efficiency was maximum with DU 100% or 75% and FV70%.

Treatment
a DU of 100% or 75% and a fertigation volume of FV70%e0
Outcome
efficiency in the use of water and nutrientse0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“The maximum efficiency in the use of water and nutrients was obtained with a DU of 100% or 75% and a fertigation volume of FV70%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1425–1553 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

FV70% reduced yield.

Treatment
this fertigation volumee0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“this fertigation volume reduced the bio-productive parameters of the crop such as yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1559–1646 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield was maximum with FV100% and DU 100% or 75%.

Treatment
the volume of fertigation of 100% (FV100%), and with a DU of 100% or 75%e0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“The maximum yield and biomass were obtained with the volume of fertigation of 100% (FV100%), and with a DU of 100% or 75%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1648–1769 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Biomass was maximum with FV100% and DU 100% or 75%.

Treatment
the volume of fertigation of 100% (FV100%), and with a DU of 100% or 75%e0
Outcome
biomasse0
Direction
maximume0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“The maximum yield and biomass were obtained with the volume of fertigation of 100% (FV100%), and with a DU of 100% or 75%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1648–1769 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

DU50% reduced yield by 45% at either fertigation level.

Treatment
DU50% levele0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
reducinge0
Value
45%e0
Qualifier
with any level of fertigatione0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“DU50% level reduced all bio-productive parameters, reducing yield by 45%, as well as the water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient efficiency with any level of fertigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1771–1940 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

DU50% reduced water use efficiency at either fertigation level.

Treatment
DU50% levele0
Outcome
water use efficiency (WUE)e0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
with any level of fertigatione0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“DU50% level reduced all bio-productive parameters, reducing yield by 45%, as well as the water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient efficiency with any level of fertigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1771–1940 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

DU50% reduced nutrient efficiency at either fertigation level.

Treatment
DU50% levele0
Outcome
nutrient efficiencye0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
with any level of fertigatione0

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo
Cucurbita pepo subsp. pepo · TaxonRasbak · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“zucchini”

✓ located after whitespace/quote normalisation · title, characters 99–107 · show in text ↑
e0

“DU50% level reduced all bio-productive parameters, reducing yield by 45%, as well as the water use efficiency (WUE) and nutrient efficiency with any level of fertigation”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1771–1940 · show in text ↑

fertilization · growth · Cucurbita pepoPositive and negative results

12 papers: 11 positive, 1 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

fertilization · yield · Cucurbita pepoPositive and negative results

31 papers: 28 positive, 3 negative or no effect

27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

27 papers more in this group

See all 31 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: content · Cucurbita pepoResults agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 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.