Paper · 2024 · JOURNAL OF OASIS AGRICULTURE AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

Impact of irrigation with saline water and drought on floral quality, vegetative growth and yield of olive trees (Olea europaea L.) in an arid climate

Lina Trabelsi; Kamel Gargouri; Fathi Ben Amar; et al.

6
claims
6
verbatim quotes
0
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-sa

Abstract

The Mediterranean region's agriculture is predicted to be severely impacted negatively by climate change. In the primary production region of southern Tunisia (34°43’N, 10°41’E) in olive orchard submitted to different treatments: Rain-fed, drip irrigation with saline water (FI) : EC = 7.5 dS/m at 100% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc), alternate irrigation (PRD) with saline water at 50% of ETc and switched every 30 days, regular deficit irrigation (RDI) with saline water at 50% of ETc, drip irrigation with tap water (TW) : EC=2.46 dS/m at 100% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc), with predicted temperature increases, the effects of climate change and salinity on the floral performance of olive trees were assessed from 2015 to 2017 and the vegetative growth and yield were evaluated over the period. As results, while conserving water in comparison to FI and TW, PRD produced high values for internodes length (1.68 cm) in 2016 and an annual shoot elongation (2.5 cm) in 2015. When comparing flowering (RF) and fruit-setting (RS) rates, olive trees under PRD outperformed those under RDI and FI with (RF=67.52% and RS=7.81%) in 2015. For olive trees exposed to RDI, PRD, and FI, the fruits per unit length were statistically similar in 2015. The use of the PRD technique (50% ETc) yielded good results with an average of 2.96(kg/m3) in our study both quantitatively and qualitatively.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PRD produced high olive internode length of 1.68 cm in 2016 while saving water.

Treatment
PRDe0
Outcome
internodes lengthe0
Direction
highe0
Value
1.68 cme0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“PRD produced high values for internodes length (1.68 cm) in 2016”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 868–932 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PRD produced annual shoot elongation of 2.5 cm in 2015.

Treatment
PRDe0
Outcome
annual shoot elongatione0
Direction
highe0
Value
2.5 cme0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“PRD produced high values for internodes length (1.68 cm) in 2016 and an annual shoot elongation (2.5 cm) in 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 868–980 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PRD outperformed RDI and FI in flowering rate, reaching 67.52% in 2015.

Taxon
olive treesOlea europaeae0
Treatment
PRDe0
Outcome
RFe0
Direction
outperformede0
Value
67.52%e0
Comparator
RDI and FIe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“olive trees under PRD outperformed those under RDI and FI with (RF=67.52% and RS=7.81%) in 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1042–1137 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PRD outperformed RDI and FI in fruit-setting rate, reaching 7.81% in 2015.

Taxon
olive treesOlea europaeae0
Treatment
PRDe0
Outcome
RSe0
Direction
outperformede0
Value
7.81%e0
Comparator
RDI and FIe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“olive trees under PRD outperformed those under RDI and FI with (RF=67.52% and RS=7.81%) in 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1042–1137 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit counts per unit length were statistically similar among RDI, PRD and FI in 2015.

Taxon
olive treesOlea europaeae0
Treatment
RDI, PRD, and FIe0
Outcome
fruits per unit lengthe0
Direction
similare0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Olea europaea
Olea europaea · TaxonHans Hillewaert · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“For olive trees exposed to RDI, PRD, and FI, the fruits per unit length were statistically similar in 2015”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1139–1245 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PRD yielded water productivity averaging 2.96 kg/m3.

Treatment
PRD technique (50% ETc)e0
Outcome
good resultse0
Direction
goode0
Value
2.96(kg/m3)e0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The use of the PRD technique (50% ETc) yielded good results with an average of 2.96(kg/m3)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1247–1337 · show in text ↑

irrigation · growth · Olea europaea (common olive)Results differ

44 papers: 22 positive, 22 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

40 papers more in this group

See all 44 papers →

irrigation · yield · Olea europaea (common olive)Results differ

53 papers: 26 positive, 27 negative or no effect

26 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

49 papers more in this group

See all 53 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.