Paper · 2020 · Revista CERES

Physiology and production of yellow passion fruit with hydroabsorbent polymer and different irrigation depths

Adailza Guilherme Cavalcante; Lourival Ferreira Cavalcante; Antônio Gustavo de Luna Souto; et al.

3
claims
5
verbatim quotes
9
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

The yellow passion fruit is grown under different edaphoclimatic conditions. Irrigation standardizes and increases the development and productivity of the plants. The objective of this study was to evaluate the physiological and productive aspects of yellow passion fruit with application of hydroabsorbent polymer at different irrigation depths. The experimental design was in randomized blocks in a 2 × 5 factorial arrangement. The treatments were soil with and without polymer and five dephts of irrigation (60 to 100% of crop evapotranspiration). Initial, maximum, and variable chlorophyll fluorescence, physiology (photosynthetic rate, internal carbon concentration, transpiration, stomatal conductance, water use efficiency, and instantaneous carboxylation efficiency) and production of yellow passion fruit were the variables analyzed. The hydrogel probably retained water in its structure, reducing the ability to dissipate excess energy. Setting the irrigation depth at an estimated 82% of crop evapotranspiration increased photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, and water use efficiency of yellow passion fruit plants. Maximum yield was 17.2 t ha-1 in irrigated plants at 100% evapotranspiration (ETc) in soil without hydrogel.

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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation at an estimated 82% of crop evapotranspiration increased photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance and water use efficiency of yellow passion fruit.

Taxon
yellow passion fruite1
Treatment
irrigation depth at an estimated 82% of crop evapotranspiratione1
Outcome
photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, and water use efficiencye1
Direction
increasede1

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e1

“Setting the irrigation depth at an estimated 82% of crop evapotranspiration increased photosynthetic rate, stomatal conductance, and water use efficiency of yellow passion fruit plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 947–1131 · show in text ↑
Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The hydrogel probably reduced the ability of yellow passion fruit to dissipate excess energy by retaining water in its structure.

Taxon
yellow passion fruite0
Treatment
hydrogele2
Outcome
ability to dissipate excess energye2
Qualifier
probablye2

Verbatim

e0

“The yellow passion fruit is grown under different edaphoclimatic conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–75 · show in text ↑
e2

“The hydrogel probably retained water in its structure, reducing the ability to dissipate excess energy”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 843–945 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Maximum yield of yellow passion fruit was 17.2 t ha-1 in irrigated plants at 100% ETc in soil without hydrogel.

Taxon
yellow passion fruite0
Treatment
irrigated plants at 100% evapotranspiration (ETc) in soil without hydrogele3
Outcome
Maximum yielde3
Value
17.2 t ha-1e3

Verbatim

e0

“The yellow passion fruit is grown under different edaphoclimatic conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–75 · show in text ↑
e3

“Maximum yield was 17.2 t ha-1 in irrigated plants at 100% evapotranspiration (ETc) in soil without hydrogel”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1133–1240 · show in text ↑

irrigation · physiology: photosynthesis · Passiflora edulis (passion fruit)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 1 positive, 5 negative or no effect

5 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.