Abstract
A three-season study was conducted to compare drip irrigation to subirrigation (seepage) for polyethylene-mulched and staked tomato production in southwest Florida. Water-table levels and soil-water status were monitored. Tomato plant growth, nutrient levels, yield, and water required for two irrigation methods were measured. Fixed and variable costs for each system were computed. Results indicated that yield and quality of fruit were not significantly different. There was, however, a significant reduction in water required by drip irrigation, which averaged 50% of pan evaporation. Reduction in pumping costs compensated to some extent for the additional cost of the drip irrigation system. The seasonal additional cost for drip irrigation (excluding labor) was $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1).
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato fruit yield did not differ significantly between drip irrigation and subirrigation.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume1 - Treatment
- drip irrigatione1
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- not significantly differente0
- Comparator
- subirrigatione1
- Setting
- southwest Floridae1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Results indicated that yield and quality of fruit were not significantly different.”
e1“compare drip irrigation to subirrigation (seepage) for polyethylene-mulched and staked tomato production in southwest Florida.”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato fruit quality did not differ significantly between drip irrigation and subirrigation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- drip irrigatione1
- Outcome
- quality of fruite0
- Direction
- not significantly differente0
- Comparator
- subirrigatione1
- Setting
- southwest Floridae1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Results indicated that yield and quality of fruit were not significantly different.”
e1“compare drip irrigation to subirrigation (seepage) for polyethylene-mulched and staked tomato production in southwest Florida.”
Claim · model-written summary
Drip irrigation significantly reduced water required, averaging 50% of pan evaporation.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- drip irrigatione0
- Outcome
- water requirede0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 50% of pan evaporatione0
- Comparator
- subirrigatione1
- Setting
- southwest Floridae1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was, however, a significant reduction in water required by drip irrigation, which averaged 50% of pan evaporation.”
e1“compare drip irrigation to subirrigation (seepage) for polyethylene-mulched and staked tomato production in southwest Florida.”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced pumping costs partly offset the additional drip irrigation system cost.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Outcome
- Reduction in pumping costse0
- Direction
- compensated to some extente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduction in pumping costs compensated to some extent for the additional cost of the drip irrigation system.”
e1“tomato production in southwest Florida.”
Claim · model-written summary
The seasonal added cost of drip irrigation excluding labor was $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1).
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume1
- Outcome
- seasonal additional cost for drip irrigatione0
- Value
- $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The seasonal additional cost for drip irrigation (excluding labor) was $328 ha-1 ($132 ac-1).”
e1“tomato production in southwest Florida.”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: general · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 28 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 papers →irrigation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
104 papers in the same direction as this paper · 239 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
340 papers more in this group
See all 344 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.