Abstract
Field study was conducted on a sandy loam soil during 2012-13 and 2013-14 in per-humid region of India to investigate the effects of fertigation patterns and planting geometries on crop growth, yield and water productivity (WP) of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) hybrid variety Swarna Sampada. Three fertigation patterns, viz. almost uniform dose per fertigation event (FP1), higher dose during initial stage of crop (FP2) and higher dose during mid- stage of crop (FP3) in combination with 4 planting geometries, viz. rectangular planting geometry with row-to-row and plant-to-plant spacing of 50 cm × 75 cm (S1) and three triangulated paired row (60 cm between paired row) planting geometries 40 cm × 70 cm (S2), 40 cm × 50 cm (S3) and 40 cm × 30 cm (S4) were evaluated in a split plot design replicated thrice. Effect of fertigation pattern was non-significant on crop growth. Whereas crop growth was negatively impacted by the higher plant densities (40 000 and 66 600 plants/ha under S3 and S4, respectively). The fertigation pattern FP3 recorded significantly highest average tomato yield of 79.2 tonnes/ha than those of FP1 and FP2. Triangulated planting geometries S2 and S3 recorded significantly higher fruit yield of tomato than S1 and S4 planting geometries. Higher WP of 13.4 kg/m3 recorded in FP3 in comparison to rest of the two fertigation patterns. Results revealed that fruit yield of tomato responded well when higher percentage of recommended dose is applied during mid-stage (10 to 16th week after transplanting) of the crop growth period. Triangulated arrangements of planting (S2 and S3) appeared to be the most effective in terms of fruit yield and WP of drip irrigated tomato. However, S2 may be preferred among all the planting geometries due to lesser plants/ha consequently requiring lesser inputs.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-sa. 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
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigation pattern had no significant effect on crop growth.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume1 - Treatment
- fertigation patterne0
- Outcome
- crop growthe0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effect of fertigation pattern was non-significant on crop growth.”
e1“of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher plant densities under S3 and S4 harmed crop growth.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- higher plant densities (40 000 and 66 600 plants/ha under S3 and S4, respectively)e0
- Outcome
- crop growthe0
- Direction
- negatively impactede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“crop growth was negatively impacted by the higher plant densities (40 000 and 66 600 plants/ha under S3 and S4, respectively).”
e1“of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
FP3 achieved the highest average tomato yield of 79.2 tonnes/ha versus FP1 and FP2.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- FP3e0
- Outcome
- average tomato yielde0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 79.2 tonnes/hae0
- Comparator
- FP1 and FP2e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fertigation pattern FP3 recorded significantly highest average tomato yield of 79.2 tonnes/ha than those of FP1 and FP2.”
Claim · model-written summary
S2 planting gave significantly higher tomato fruit yield than S1 and S4.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- S2e0
- Outcome
- fruit yield of tomatoe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- S1 and S4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triangulated planting geometries S2 and S3 recorded significantly higher fruit yield of tomato than S1 and S4 planting geometries.”
Claim · model-written summary
S3 planting gave significantly higher tomato fruit yield than S1 and S4.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- S3e0
- Outcome
- fruit yield of tomatoe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- S1 and S4e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triangulated planting geometries S2 and S3 recorded significantly higher fruit yield of tomato than S1 and S4 planting geometries.”
Claim · model-written summary
FP3 gave higher water productivity of 13.4 kg/m3 than the other patterns.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- FP3e0
- Outcome
- WPe0
- Direction
- Highere0
- Value
- 13.4 kg/m3e0
- Comparator
- rest of the two fertigation patternse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Higher WP of 13.4 kg/m3 recorded in FP3 in comparison to rest of the two fertigation patterns.”
e1“of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
S2 and S3 arrangements were most effective for fruit yield and water productivity.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- S2 and S3e0
- Outcome
- most effective in terms of fruit yield and WPe0
- Direction
- most effectivee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Triangulated arrangements of planting (S2 and S3) appeared to be the most effective in terms of fruit yield and WP of drip irrigated tomato.”
Claim · model-written summary
S2 may be preferred due to fewer plants and lower input requirements.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Outcome
- S2 may be preferrede0
- Qualifier
- lesser plants/ha consequently requiring lesser inputse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“S2 may be preferred among all the planting geometries due to lesser plants/ha consequently requiring lesser inputs.”
e1“drip irrigated tomato”
The same questions in other papers
density · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →fertilization · growth · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
100 papers in the same direction as this paper · 567 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
664 papers more in this group
See all 668 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.