Abstract
Tomato vine decline (TVD) disease complex results in fruit yield loss, but what soil management strategies might mitigate it? In commercial fields with a history of TVD, five approaches (soil organic amendments and transplant treatments) were evaluated for their impact on fruit yield, fruit quality, and microbial abundance or diversity at four site-years. One site-year had very high TVD pressure and high variability with no yield differences, thus efforts focused on the remaining site-years. Marketable yield was not different among treatments but numerically followed a trend similar to total yield. Amending soil with poultry manure delayed maturity (i.e., increased proportion of green fruit) and had the greatest total yield increases of 17.2%, congruent with decreased abundance of root pathogens (Verticillium dahliae, Rhizopicnis vagum). Microbial DNA fingerprinting data of rhizospheres, roots and (or) stems suggested treatments did not significantly shift the total diversity fungal nor bacterial populations, but the aforementioned pathogen loads were reduced with the application of organic amendments relative to the untreated control. While drenching tomato transplants with pseudomonad culture increased their presence in roots, pathogen load was not reduced relative to the untreated control. Overall, these results show that soil organic amendments were able to improve tomato total yield in two of four site-years without reducing fruit quality (i.e., soluble solids, pH, colour), perhaps, in part, due to their ability to suppress specific root pathogens in commercial fields.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
A high-pressure site-year showed no yield differences.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Outcome
- yield differencese0
- Direction
- no yield differencese0
- Setting
- site-yeare0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“One site-year had very high TVD pressure and high variability with no yield differences”
t0“tomato vine decline”
Claim · model-written summary
Marketable yield did not differ among treatments.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- Marketable yielde0
- Direction
- not differente0
- Comparator
- among treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Marketable yield was not different among treatments but numerically followed a trend similar to total yield.”
t0“tomato vine decline”
Claim · model-written summary
Poultry manure delayed tomato fruit maturity.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Organ / stage
- green fruite0
- Treatment
- poultry manuree0
- Outcome
- maturitye0
- Direction
- delayede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Amending soil with poultry manure delayed maturity (i.e., increased proportion of green fruit)”
t0“tomato vine decline”
Claim · model-written summary
Poultry manure produced the greatest total yield increase, 17.2%.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- poultry manuree0
- Outcome
- total yielde0
- Direction
- increasese0
- Value
- 17.2%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Amending soil with poultry manure delayed maturity (i.e., increased proportion of green fruit) and had the greatest total yield increases of 17.2%”
t0“tomato vine decline”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic amendments reduced root pathogen loads compared with untreated control.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- organic amendmentse0
- Interactor
- root pathogense1pathogen
- Outcome
- pathogen loadse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“pathogen loads were reduced with the application of organic amendments relative to the untreated control.”
t0“tomato vine decline”
e1“root pathogens (Verticillium dahliae, Rhizopicnis vagum)”
Claim · model-written summary
Treatments did not significantly shift fungal or bacterial diversity.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- treatmentse0
- Outcome
- total diversity fungal nor bacterial populationse0
- Direction
- did not significantly shifte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“treatments did not significantly shift the total diversity fungal nor bacterial populations”
t0“tomato vine decline”
Claim · model-written summary
Pseudomonad drench increased pseudomonad presence in roots.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- pseudomonad culturee0
- Interactor
- pseudomonade0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- their presence in rootse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“drenching tomato transplants with pseudomonad culture increased their presence in roots”
Claim · model-written summary
Pseudomonad drench did not reduce pathogen load compared with untreated control.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- pseudomonad culturee1
- Interactor
- pseudomonade1biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- pathogen loade0
- Direction
- not reducede0
- Comparator
- untreated controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“pathogen load was not reduced relative to the untreated control.”
t0“tomato vine decline”
e1“drenching tomato transplants with pseudomonad culture”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic amendments improved total yield in two of four site-years.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- soil organic amendmentse0
- Outcome
- total yielde0
- Direction
- improvee0
- Qualifier
- two of four site-yearse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“soil organic amendments were able to improve tomato total yield in two of four site-years”
Claim · model-written summary
Organic amendments did not reduce soluble solids, pH or colour.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- soil organic amendmentse1
- Outcome
- fruit quality (i.e., soluble solids, pH, colour)e0
- Direction
- without reducinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“without reducing fruit quality (i.e., soluble solids, pH, colour)”
t0“tomato vine decline”
e1“soil organic amendments were able to improve tomato total yield”
The same questions in other papers
organic · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ
52 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
55 papers more in this group
See all 59 papers →organic · quality: sugar starch · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →fertilization · phenology · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
44 papers more in this group
See all 48 papers →fertilization · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
849 papers in the same direction as this paper · 104 in the opposite direction · 24 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
974 papers more in this group
See all 978 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.