Abstract
The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops. Precise estimation of ETo, kc,ETc daily is important to apply water through a drip system in the open field and greenhouse. The ETo was estimated in the open field using “FAO-56 Penman-Monteith method” whereas, inside the greenhouse ETo was estimated using “Makkink FAO-24”. The value represents crop specific water use and it is a requirement for accurate estimation of irrigation requirements for cucumber crops. The accumulated heat units (HUs) were used to determine the kc daily for each growing stage. The results revealed that the monthly ETo values under greenhouse were less than those under open field for all months. Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems. The estimated results of total AIW indicated that significant irrigation water saving occurs through the cultivation of cucumber under the greenhouse as compared to open field cultivation by nearly 33.5 % as the value of AIW inside the greenhouse was 903.9 m3/fed, while the value outside was 1359.7 m3/fed. Regarding the WP result, values were 33.46 and 15.97 kg/m3 under the greenhouse and open field conditions respectively.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Monthly reference evapotranspiration of cucumber was lower under greenhouse than under open field conditions in every month.
- Taxon
- cucumber
Cucumis sativuse1 - Treatment
- greenhousee2
- Outcome
- monthly ETo valuese2
- Direction
- lesse2
- Comparator
- open fielde2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e2“The results revealed that the monthly ETo values under greenhouse were less than those under open field for all months”
Claim · model-written summary
Open field cucumber crop coefficient at the initial stage was 0.30.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Open field cucumber crop coefficient at the development stage was 0.60.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Open field cucumber crop coefficient at the mid stage was 1.01.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Open field cucumber crop coefficient at the late stage was 0.81.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse cucumber crop coefficient at the initial stage was 0.32.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse cucumber crop coefficient at the development stage was 0.79.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Organ / stage
- Developmente3
- Outcome
- kce3
- Value
- 0.79e3
- Setting
- under greenhousee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse cucumber crop coefficient at the mid stage was 1.03.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Greenhouse cucumber crop coefficient at the late stage was 0.56.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Organ / stage
- late stagee3
- Outcome
- kce3
- Value
- 0.56e3
- Setting
- under greenhousee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
The mid growth stage had the highest crop coefficient of cucumber in both open field and greenhouse culture.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Organ / stage
- Mid stagee3
- Outcome
- kce3
- Qualifier
- highest valuee3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e3“Mean values of kc in the open field during the Four growth stage (Initial, Development, Mid and late stage) was 0.30, 0.60, 1.01 and 0.81 while it was 0.32, 0.79, 1.03 and 0.56 under greenhouse, where the Mid stage recorded the highest value in both cultivation systems”
Claim · model-written summary
Applied irrigation water inside the greenhouse was 903.9 m3/fed for cucumber.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Outcome
- AIWe5
- Value
- 903.9 m3/fede5
- Setting
- inside the greenhousee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e5“the value of AIW inside the greenhouse was 903.9 m3/fed, while the value outside was 1359.7 m3/fed”
Claim · model-written summary
Applied irrigation water outside (open field) was 1359.7 m3/fed for cucumber.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Outcome
- AIWe5
- Value
- 1359.7 m3/fede5
- Setting
- outsidee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e5“the value of AIW inside the greenhouse was 903.9 m3/fed, while the value outside was 1359.7 m3/fed”
Claim · model-written summary
Cucumber grown in the greenhouse saved about 33.5% applied irrigation water compared with open field cultivation.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse4
- Treatment
- cultivation of cucumber under the greenhousee4
- Outcome
- irrigation water savinge4
- Direction
- decreaseinferrede4
- Value
- 33.5 %e4
- Comparator
- open field cultivatione4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“significant irrigation water saving occurs through the cultivation of cucumber under the greenhouse as compared to open field cultivation by nearly 33.5 %”
Claim · model-written summary
Water productivity of cucumber was 33.46 kg/m3 under greenhouse and 15.97 kg/m3 in the open field.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse1
- Treatment
- under the greenhousee6
- Outcome
- WPe6
- Direction
- higherinferrede6
- Value
- 33.46 and 15.97 kg/m3e6
- Comparator
- open field conditionse6
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“The present study was conducted to compare the reference evapotranspiration (ETo), crop coefficient (kc), applied irrigation water (AIW) and water productivity (WP) under the open field and greenhouse conditions for cucumber crops”
e6“Regarding the WP result, values were 33.46 and 15.97 kg/m3 under the greenhouse and open field conditions respectively”
The same questions in other papers
cultivation system · physiology: water · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- 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.