Abstract
Field experiments were conducted in two seasons to investigate growth, physiology and yield responses of cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande) to deficit irrigation. In 2012 season, 50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) irrigation temporarily decreased plant size, reduced leaf area, fresh weight, relative water content, specific leaf area and gas exchange during late development, and decreased head fresh weight, size, marketable and total yield. Deficit irrigation at 75% ETc had little influence on plant growth and physiology, but it still reduced both marketable and total yield. In 2013 season, 75% ETc irrigation had little influence on plant growth, leaf characteristics, photosynthetic rate, head fresh weight and size, but it temporarily increased chlorophyll and carotenoid content, and decreased stomata conductance, transpiration, and marketable yield. Pennant, the green-head cultivar, had higher photosynthetic rate, head fresh weight, marketable and total yield than the red-head cultivar Rio Grande. In both seasons, deficit irrigations did not influence cabbage head dry weight, indicating that most yield reduction under deficit irrigations is related to water content.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 13
Claim · model-written summary
In 2012, 50% ETc irrigation temporarily decreased plant size, leaf area, fresh weight and specific leaf area.
- Taxon
- cabbage
Brassica oleracea var. capitatae1 - Treatment
- 50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) irrigatione0
- Outcome
- plant sizee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- during late developmente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2012 season, 50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) irrigation temporarily decreased plant size, reduced leaf area, fresh weight, relative water content, specific leaf area and gas exchange during late development”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2012, 50% ETc irrigation reduced relative water content and gas exchange.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae1
- Treatment
- 50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) irrigatione0
- Outcome
- relative water contente0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- during late developmente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2012 season, 50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) irrigation temporarily decreased plant size, reduced leaf area, fresh weight, relative water content, specific leaf area and gas exchange during late development”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2012, 50% ETc irrigation decreased head fresh weight, size, marketable and total yield.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae2
- Treatment
- 50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) irrigatione0
- Outcome
- head fresh weight, size, marketable and total yielde1
- Direction
- decreasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“50% of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) irrigation”
e1“decreased head fresh weight, size, marketable and total yield”
e2“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2012, 75% ETc irrigation had little influence on plant growth and physiology.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae1
- Treatment
- Deficit irrigation at 75% ETce0
- Outcome
- plant growth and physiologye0
- Direction
- little influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Deficit irrigation at 75% ETc had little influence on plant growth and physiology”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2012, 75% ETc irrigation reduced marketable and total yield.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae1
- Treatment
- Deficit irrigation at 75% ETce0
- Outcome
- marketable and total yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Deficit irrigation at 75% ETc had little influence on plant growth and physiology, but it still reduced both marketable and total yield”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2013, 75% ETc had little influence on plant growth, leaf characteristics, photosynthetic rate, and head fresh weight and size.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae1
- Treatment
- 75% ETc irrigatione0
- Outcome
- plant growth, leaf characteristics, photosynthetic ratee0
- Direction
- little influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2013 season, 75% ETc irrigation had little influence on plant growth, leaf characteristics, photosynthetic rate, head fresh weight and size”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2013, 75% ETc temporarily increased chlorophyll and carotenoid content.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae2
- Treatment
- 75% ETc irrigatione0
- Outcome
- chlorophyll and carotenoid contente1
- Direction
- increasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“75% ETc irrigation”
e1“temporarily increased chlorophyll and carotenoid content”
e2“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2013, 75% ETc decreased stomata conductance and transpiration.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae2
- Treatment
- 75% ETc irrigatione0
- Outcome
- stomata conductance, transpiratione1
- Direction
- decreasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“75% ETc irrigation”
e1“decreased stomata conductance, transpiration, and marketable yield”
e2“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In 2013, 75% ETc decreased marketable yield.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae2
- Treatment
- 75% ETc irrigatione0
- Outcome
- marketable yielde1
- Direction
- decreasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“75% ETc irrigation”
e1“decreased stomata conductance, transpiration, and marketable yield”
e2“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
Pennant had higher photosynthetic rate than Rio Grande.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae1
- Material
- Pennante0
- Outcome
- photosynthetic ratee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- Rio Grandee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pennant, the green-head cultivar, had higher photosynthetic rate, head fresh weight, marketable and total yield than the red-head cultivar Rio Grande”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
Pennant had higher head fresh weight, marketable and total yield than Rio Grande.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae1
- Material
- Pennante0
- Outcome
- head fresh weight, marketable and total yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- Rio Grandee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Pennant, the green-head cultivar, had higher photosynthetic rate, head fresh weight, marketable and total yield than the red-head cultivar Rio Grande”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
Claim · model-written summary
In both seasons, deficit irrigation did not influence cabbage head dry weight.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae0
- Treatment
- deficit irrigationse0
- Outcome
- cabbage head dry weighte0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In both seasons, deficit irrigations did not influence cabbage head dry weight”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors attributed most yield reduction under deficit irrigation to water content.
- Taxon
- cabbageBrassica oleracea var. capitatae1
- Outcome
- yield reductione0
- Qualifier
- related to water contente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“most yield reduction under deficit irrigations is related to water content”
e1“cabbage (Brassica oleracea L. cvs Pennant and Rio Grande)”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: photosynthesis · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
irrigation · quality: postharvest · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →irrigation · growth · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →irrigation · physiology: gas exchange · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
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.