Abstract
This research is a two year study on the effects of endomycorrhizae on vegetable production using conventional vs. organic practices. Objective of this study was initiated to determine if mycorrhizae improve yield, available soil nutrients and soil quality from two different fertilizer sources. Measurements were taken on yield, available soil nutrients, and soil quality in comparison of glomalin production and soil loss percentage. Two plant species were chosen, Tomatoes (‘Big Beef’) and Bush Beans (‘Tenderette’). A randomized split block 2 x 3 factorial treatment arrangement was used with two crops and three different inputs: Mo- 0 mycorrhizae, M1- recommended rate, and M2- 2x recommended rate of mycorrhizae. Each mycorrhizal input was replicated three times in both the conventional and organic system. Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate. There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010 and tomatoes in 2011. Possible explanations for yield difference in the organic production system include: different insect controls and a slower release of nutrients from poultry litter. Available soil nutrients were not influenced in the study based on mycorrhizal inputs in inorganic or organic tomato production. Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic tomato when compared to inorganic tomato production at selected sampling dates. Mycorrhizae did not influence soil fertility in inorganic snap bean or organic snap bean production. Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic snap bean when compared to inorganic snap bean production at selected sampling dates. Glomalin production and soil loss percentage were not shown to be significantly different within organic or inorganic treatments based on mycorrhizae inputs. However, glomalin production was shown to be significantly greater in organic production compared to inorganic in 2011. An explanation of this could be due to the use of leaf mulch as organic weed control. Although a numerical decrease was observed in soil loss percentage in organic production compared to inorganic production from the first year to the second, it was not shown to be a significant amount.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhiza addition at any rate did not significantly change crop yield.
- Taxon
- Tomatoes
Solanum lycopersicume1 - Treatment
- mycorrhizae additions at any ratee0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizaee0symbiont
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- no differencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate.”
e1“Two plant species were chosen, Tomatoes (‘Big Beef’) and Bush Beans (‘Tenderette’). A randomized split block 2 x 3 factorial treatment arrangement was used with two crops and three different inputs: Mo- 0 mycorrhizae, M1- recommended rate, and M2- 2x recommended rate of mycorrhizae. Each mycorrhizal input was replicated three times in both the conventional and organic system. Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate. There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010 and tomatoes in 2011.”
e2“Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate.”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional production had significantly different tomato and snap bean yields in 2010.
Verbatim
e0“There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010”
e1“There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010”
e2“There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010”
Claim · model-written summary
Conventional production had significantly different tomato yield in 2011.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- conventional productione1
- Outcome
- yield differencee1
- Direction
- overe1
- Qualifier
- 2011e0
- Comparator
- organic productione1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“tomatoes in 2011.”
e1“There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010 and tomatoes in 2011.”
e2“tomatoes in 2011.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inputs did not influence available soil nutrients in tomato production.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal inputse0
- Outcome
- Available soil nutrientse0
- Direction
- not influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Available soil nutrients were not influenced in the study based on mycorrhizal inputs in inorganic or organic tomato production.”
e1“Available soil nutrients were not influenced in the study based on mycorrhizal inputs in inorganic or organic tomato production.”
e2“Available soil nutrients were not influenced in the study based on mycorrhizal inputs in inorganic or organic tomato production.”
e3“Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate.”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil available nutrients differed significantly between organic and inorganic tomato systems on selected dates.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- organic tomatoe0
- Outcome
- Soil available nutrientse0
- Qualifier
- selected sampling datese0
- Comparator
- inorganic tomato productione0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic tomato when compared to inorganic tomato production at selected sampling dates.”
e1“Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic tomato when compared to inorganic tomato production at selected sampling dates.”
e2“Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic tomato when compared to inorganic tomato production at selected sampling dates.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizae did not influence soil fertility in snap bean production.
- Taxon
- snap beane0
- Treatment
- Mycorrhizaee0
- Interactor
- Mycorrhizaee0symbiont
- Outcome
- soil fertilitye0
- Direction
- did not influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Mycorrhizae did not influence soil fertility in inorganic snap bean or organic snap bean production.”
e1“Mycorrhizae did not influence soil fertility in inorganic snap bean or organic snap bean production.”
e2“Mycorrhizae did not influence soil fertility in inorganic snap bean or organic snap bean production.”
Claim · model-written summary
Available soil nutrients differed significantly between organic and inorganic snap bean systems on selected dates.
- Taxon
- snap beane0
- Treatment
- organic snap beane0
- Outcome
- Soil available nutrientse0
- Qualifier
- selected sampling datese0
- Comparator
- inorganic snap bean productione0
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic snap bean when compared to inorganic snap bean production at selected sampling dates.”
e1“Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic snap bean when compared to inorganic snap bean production at selected sampling dates.”
e2“Soil available nutrients were significantly influenced in organic snap bean when compared to inorganic snap bean production at selected sampling dates.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inputs did not significantly affect glomalin production.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- mycorrhizae inputse0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizaee0symbiont
- Outcome
- Glomalin productione0
- Direction
- not shown to be significantly differente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Glomalin production and soil loss percentage were not shown to be significantly different within organic or inorganic treatments based on mycorrhizae inputs.”
e1“Two plant species were chosen, Tomatoes (‘Big Beef’) and Bush Beans (‘Tenderette’). A randomized split block 2 x 3 factorial treatment arrangement was used with two crops and three different inputs: Mo- 0 mycorrhizae, M1- recommended rate, and M2- 2x recommended rate of mycorrhizae. Each mycorrhizal input was replicated three times in both the conventional and organic system. Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate. There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010 and tomatoes in 2011.”
e2“Glomalin production and soil loss percentage were not shown to be significantly different within organic or inorganic treatments based on mycorrhizae inputs.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inputs did not significantly affect soil loss percentage.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- mycorrhizae inputse0
- Interactor
- mycorrhizaee0symbiont
- Outcome
- soil loss percentagee0
- Direction
- not shown to be significantly differente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Glomalin production and soil loss percentage were not shown to be significantly different within organic or inorganic treatments based on mycorrhizae inputs.”
e1“Two plant species were chosen, Tomatoes (‘Big Beef’) and Bush Beans (‘Tenderette’). A randomized split block 2 x 3 factorial treatment arrangement was used with two crops and three different inputs: Mo- 0 mycorrhizae, M1- recommended rate, and M2- 2x recommended rate of mycorrhizae. Each mycorrhizal input was replicated three times in both the conventional and organic system. Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate. There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010 and tomatoes in 2011.”
e2“Glomalin production and soil loss percentage were not shown to be significantly different within organic or inorganic treatments based on mycorrhizae inputs.”
Claim · model-written summary
Glomalin production was significantly greater in organic than inorganic production in 2011.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- organic productione0
- Outcome
- glomalin productione0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Qualifier
- 2011e0
- Comparator
- inorganice0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“glomalin production was shown to be significantly greater in organic production compared to inorganic in 2011.”
e1“Two plant species were chosen, Tomatoes (‘Big Beef’) and Bush Beans (‘Tenderette’). A randomized split block 2 x 3 factorial treatment arrangement was used with two crops and three different inputs: Mo- 0 mycorrhizae, M1- recommended rate, and M2- 2x recommended rate of mycorrhizae. Each mycorrhizal input was replicated three times in both the conventional and organic system. Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate. There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010 and tomatoes in 2011.”
e2“glomalin production was shown to be significantly greater in organic production compared to inorganic in 2011.”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil loss percentage numerically decreased in organic compared with inorganic production, but the difference was not significant.
- Taxon
- TomatoesSolanum lycopersicume1
- Treatment
- organic productione0
- Outcome
- soil loss percentagee0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Comparator
- inorganic productione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“a numerical decrease was observed in soil loss percentage in organic production compared to inorganic production from the first year to the second, it was not shown to be a significant amount.”
e1“Two plant species were chosen, Tomatoes (‘Big Beef’) and Bush Beans (‘Tenderette’). A randomized split block 2 x 3 factorial treatment arrangement was used with two crops and three different inputs: Mo- 0 mycorrhizae, M1- recommended rate, and M2- 2x recommended rate of mycorrhizae. Each mycorrhizal input was replicated three times in both the conventional and organic system. Results show there was no difference in yield based on mycorrhizae additions at any rate. There was a significant yield difference based on conventional production over organic production in tomatoes and snap beans in 2010 and tomatoes in 2011.”
e2“a numerical decrease was observed in soil loss percentage in organic production compared to inorganic production from the first year to the second, it was not shown to be a significant amount.”
The same questions in other papers
mycorrhiza · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 59 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
61 papers more in this group
See all 65 papers →mycorrhiza · soil: physics · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
cultivation system · soil: physics · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →cultivation system · yield · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Positive and negative results
9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →mycorrhiza · nutrient: content · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 44 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
43 papers more in this group
See all 47 papers →cultivation system · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
77 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- no effect
99 papers more in this group
See all 103 papers →mycorrhiza · soil: chemistry · Phaseolus vulgaris (common bean)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
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.