Abstract
Some amount of shade may be optimal to produce high-quality tomatoes in a greenhouse during summer months in the northeast United States. Simultaneous comparisons were made among greenhouse sections that were either not shaded or covered with reflective aluminized shadecloth that attenuated 15%, 30%, or 50% of direct sunlight. The shadecloth was applied at the start of warm weather in June. The houses were shaded for the rest of the summer, and fruit was picked until late August. Total yield decreased linearly with increasing shade, but there was no significant difference among shade treatments in marketable yield. The fraction of fruit that was marketable was greatest for plants grown under 50% shade. This fraction was 9% greater than in a greenhouse with no shade in 2003 and 7% greater in 2004 and 2005. Cracked skin was the defect most affected by shade. Among sensitive cultivars, up to 35% of the fruit produced in greenhouses with no shade had cracked skin, whereas in greenhouses covered with 50% shade, only 24% to 26% of the tomatoes had cracked skin. There was no consistent trend for shade density in the fraction of fruit with green shoulder, blossom end rot, or irregular shape. The effect of shade increased with duration of shading. There was no effect of 50% shade compared with no shade on total yield within 20 days, but yield decreased by 20% in the interval from 25 to 45 days after shading and by 30% after 50 or more days of shading in 2005. Marketable yield only decreased after more than 45 days of shading for cultivars that were not sensitive to cracked skin or uneven ripening. Shade decreased fruit size over the entire season only in 2003. In general, shading increased the fraction of marketable tomato fruit without affecting fruit size.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Total tomato yield decreased linearly with increasing shade.
- Taxon
- Tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Treatment
- increasing shadee0
- Outcome
- Total yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total yield decreased linearly with increasing shade”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Marketable yield did not significantly differ among shade treatments.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- shade treatmentse0
- Outcome
- marketable yielde0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“there was no significant difference among shade treatments in marketable yield.”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
The marketable fruit fraction was greatest under 50% shade.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 50% shadee0
- Outcome
- fraction of fruit that was marketablee0
- Direction
- greateste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fraction of fruit that was marketable was greatest for plants grown under 50% shade.”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
The marketable fraction under 50% shade exceeded no shade by 9% in 2003.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 50% shadee1
- Outcome
- fractione0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 9%e0
- Qualifier
- 2003e0
- Comparator
- no shadee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This fraction was 9% greater than in a greenhouse with no shade in 2003”
t0“Tomato”
e1“The fraction of fruit that was marketable was greatest for plants grown under 50% shade.”
Claim · model-written summary
The marketable fraction under 50% shade exceeded no shade by 7% in 2004 and 2005.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 50% shadee1
- Outcome
- fractione3
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 7%e0
- Qualifier
- 2004 and 2005e0
- Comparator
- no shadee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“7% greater in 2004 and 2005”
t0“Tomato”
e1“The fraction of fruit that was marketable was greatest for plants grown under 50% shade.”
e2“This fraction was 9% greater than in a greenhouse with no shade in 2003”
e3“The fraction of fruit that was marketable was greatest for plants grown under 50% shade.”
Claim · model-written summary
Shade most strongly affected cracked skin among defects.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- shadee0
- Outcome
- Cracked skine0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cracked skin was the defect most affected by shade.”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
In sensitive cultivars, cracked skin affected up to 35% without shade but 24% to 26% under 50% shade.
- Taxon
- tomatoesSolanum lycopersicume0
- Material
- sensitive cultivarse0
- Treatment
- 50% shadee0
- Outcome
- cracked skine0
- Direction
- onlye0
- Value
- 24% to 26%e0
- Qualifier
- up to 35%e0
- Comparator
- no shadee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Among sensitive cultivars, up to 35% of the fruit produced in greenhouses with no shade had cracked skin, whereas in greenhouses covered with 50% shade, only 24% to 26% of the tomatoes had cracked skin.”
Claim · model-written summary
Shade density showed no consistent trend for green shoulder, blossom end rot and irregular shape fractions.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- shade densitye0
- Outcome
- fraction of fruit with green shoulder, blossom end rot, or irregular shapee0
- Direction
- no consistent trende0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was no consistent trend for shade density in the fraction of fruit with green shoulder, blossom end rot, or irregular shape.”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Shade effects increased with shading duration.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- duration of shadinge0
- Outcome
- effect of shadee0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The effect of shade increased with duration of shading.”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Total yield showed no effect of 50% shade within 20 days.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- 50% shadee0
- Outcome
- total yielde0
- Direction
- no effecte0
- Qualifier
- within 20 dayse0
- Comparator
- no shadee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“There was no effect of 50% shade compared with no shade on total yield within 20 days”
t0“Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Total yield decreased 20% 25 to 45 days after shading.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- shadinge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 20%e0
- Qualifier
- 25 to 45 dayse0
- Comparator
- no shadee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“yield decreased by 20% in the interval from 25 to 45 days after shading”
t0“Tomato”
e2“This fraction was 9% greater than in a greenhouse with no shade in 2003”
Claim · model-written summary
Total yield decreased 30% after at least 50 days of shading in 2005.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- shadinge0
- Outcome
- yielde4
- Direction
- decreasede5
- Value
- 30%e0
- Qualifier
- 50 or more days of shading in 2005e0
- Comparator
- no shadee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“by 30% after 50 or more days of shading in 2005”
t0“Tomato”
e2“This fraction was 9% greater than in a greenhouse with no shade in 2003”
e4“yield decreased by 20% in the interval from 25 to 45 days after shading”
e5“Total yield decreased linearly with increasing shade”
Claim · model-written summary
Marketable yield declined only after over 45 days of shading in cultivars insensitive to cracking or uneven ripening.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- shadinge0
- Outcome
- Marketable yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- more than 45 dayse0
- Comparator
- no shadee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Marketable yield only decreased after more than 45 days of shading for cultivars that were not sensitive to cracked skin or uneven ripening.”
t0“Tomato”
e2“This fraction was 9% greater than in a greenhouse with no shade in 2003”
Claim · model-written summary
Shade decreased fruit size over the entire season only in 2003.
- Taxon
- TomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- Shadee0
- Outcome
- fruit sizee0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- only in 2003e0
- Comparator
- no shadee2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shade decreased fruit size over the entire season only in 2003.”
t0“Tomato”
e2“This fraction was 9% greater than in a greenhouse with no shade in 2003”
The same questions in other papers
shade · quality: postharvest · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →shade · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Results differ
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
40 papers more in this group
See all 44 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.