Abstract
Abstract Yields of snap bean pods were increased by irrigation and plant density in 4 field experiments. Highest yields were obtained with the −0.6 bar soil water potential regime which represented removal of 40-45 percent of the available soil water at 30 cm depth. Yields were lowest with the −2.5 bars soil water potential which represented 65-70 percent water removal. An average of 60 percent more water applied to the −0.6 bar than the −2.5 bars treatment increased yields approximately 54 percent. Yields were usually intermediate with the −1.0 bar soil water potential representing 50-55 percent available soil water removal. Two cultivars were used in 2 of the experiments and responded differently to irrigation. Yield of ‘Oregon 1604’ was higher than that of ‘Galamor’ with −0.6 bar soil water potential but was lower than ‘Galamor’ with −2.5 bars. Yield of ‘Oregon 1604’ averaged 27 percent higher in square arrangement than in 91 cm rows and the increase was greater for the high than for the low population density when compared in 1 experiment. Yield was 20 percent higher for high density of 43.0 plants/m 2 than for low density of 21.5 plants/m 2 . Yields of 2 cultivars in 2 experiments averaged 67 percent higher in high density (40-57 plants/m 2 ) than in low density (20-33 plants/m 2 ) plantings. There were no consistent irrigation × density interactions. Usually there was a more rapid depletion of soil water for high density than for low density. Fiber in canned sieve size 5 pods was higher in ‘Oregon 1604’ at −2.5 bars soil water potential than for ‘Galamor’, but at the −0.6 bar soil water potential regime, the amount of fiber was similar in the 2 cultivars. Percent of pod weight attributed to seed and percent fiber were usually highest at −2.5 soil water potential.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 14
Claim · model-written summary
The wetter −0.6 bar regime gave the highest snap bean yields.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Highest yields were obtained with the −0.6 bar soil water potential regime”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
The drier −2.5 bars regime gave the lowest yields.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Yields were lowest with the −2.5 bars soil water potential”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Applying 60% more water at −0.6 bar increased yields about 54% relative to −2.5 bars.
Verbatim
e0“An average of 60 percent more water applied to the −0.6 bar than the −2.5 bars treatment increased yields approximately 54 percent”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Yields at −1.0 bar were usually intermediate.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Yields were usually intermediate with the −1.0 bar soil water potential”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Oregon 1604 yielded more than Galamor at −0.6 bar.
Verbatim
e0“Yield of ‘Oregon 1604’ was higher than that of ‘Galamor’ with −0.6 bar soil water potential”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Oregon 1604 yielded less than Galamor at −2.5 bars.
Verbatim
e0“Yield of ‘Oregon 1604’ was higher than that of ‘Galamor’ with −0.6 bar soil water potential but was lower than ‘Galamor’ with −2.5 bars”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Oregon 1604 yielded 27% more in square arrangement than in 91 cm rows.
Verbatim
e0“Yield of ‘Oregon 1604’ averaged 27 percent higher in square arrangement than in 91 cm rows”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
High density at 43.0 plants/m2 gave 20% higher yield than 21.5 plants/m2.
Verbatim
e0“Yield was 20 percent higher for high density of 43.0 plants/m 2 than for low density of 21.5 plants/m 2”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Across two cultivars, high density gave 67% higher yields than low density.
Verbatim
e0“Yields of 2 cultivars in 2 experiments averaged 67 percent higher in high density (40-57 plants/m 2 ) than in low density (20-33 plants/m 2 ) plantings”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation and density showed no consistent interaction.
Verbatim
e0“There were no consistent irrigation × density interactions”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil water was usually depleted faster under high than low density.
Verbatim
e0“Usually there was a more rapid depletion of soil water for high density than for low density”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
At −2.5 bars, Oregon 1604 canned pods had more fiber than Galamor.
Verbatim
e0“Fiber in canned sieve size 5 pods was higher in ‘Oregon 1604’ at −2.5 bars soil water potential than for ‘Galamor’”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
At −0.6 bar, Oregon 1604 and Galamor pod fiber amounts were similar.
Verbatim
e0“at the −0.6 bar soil water potential regime, the amount of fiber was similar in the 2 cultivars”
t0“Snap Beans”
Claim · model-written summary
The drier −2.5 bar regime usually gave the highest pod seed weight share and fiber percentage.
- Taxon
- snap beant0
- Treatment
- −2.5 soil water potentiale0
- Outcome
- Percent of pod weight attributed to seed and percent fibere0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Percent of pod weight attributed to seed and percent fiber were usually highest at −2.5 soil water potential”
t0“Snap Beans”
The same questions in other papers
soil water · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 papers →soil water · quality: grain · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.