Abstract
SUMMARY Six experiments were carried out during 1973 and 1974 to study the effects of some cultural practices on tobacco. In Expts 1 and 2 effects of N, topping and suckering were studied. Leaf area was increased by N and topping in both experiments. Suckering significantly decreased, and slightly increased, the area in Expts 1 and 2, respectively. The number of leaves per plant was increased by topping and suckering in Expt 1, but decreased by both in Expt 2. N decreased the number of leaves in both experiments. Yield of cured leaf was increased by all three factors in Expt 1 and by suckering only in Expt 2, whereas both N and topping slightly decreased the yield in the latter experiment. Quality was significantly lowered by the higher rate of N, while generally improved by topping and suckering. In Expts 3 and 4, effects of plant density, N and stage of suckering were studied. The yield of cured leaf was increased by the higher plant density, by 9 and 15%, and decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively. Early suckering was beneficial in Expt 3 (16%), but harmful in Expt 4 (8%). Leaf quality was decreased by the higher rate of N, but improved by the higher plant density. Time of removal of suckers had no significant effect on yield or quality. In Expts 5 and 6 effects of supplementary irrigation at different stages of growth were studied. Both the number of leaves per plant and yield followed very similar trends. The best yield and quality were obtained when irrigation was not limiting during all three phases of growth. However, the last phase (C) was the most critical phase regarding irrigation in Expt 5, while the first two phases were the most critical ones in Expt 6, since withholding irrigation during phase C reduced yield by 44–50%, and only 6%, in the two experiments, respectively. Leaf quality seemed to be best when irrigation was applied throughout the growth period, particularly the first two phases of growth.
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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen and topping increased tobacco leaf area in both experiments.
- Taxon
- tobacco
Nicotiana tabacumt0 - Treatment
- N and toppinge0
- Outcome
- Leaf areae0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaf area was increased by N and topping in both experiments.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Suckering significantly decreased leaf area in experiment 1.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- Suckeringe0
- Outcome
- areae0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- Expts 1e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Suckering significantly decreased, and slightly increased, the area in Expts 1 and 2, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Suckering slightly increased leaf area in experiment 2.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Suckering significantly decreased, and slightly increased, the area in Expts 1 and 2, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Topping and suckering increased leaves per plant in experiment 1 but decreased them in experiment 2.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- topping and suckeringe0
- Outcome
- number of leaves per plante0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- decreased by both in Expt 2e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The number of leaves per plant was increased by topping and suckering in Expt 1, but decreased by both in Expt 2.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen decreased leaves per plant in both experiments.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- Ne0
- Outcome
- number of leavese0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“N decreased the number of leaves in both experiments.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
All three factors increased cured-leaf yield in experiment 1.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- all three factorse0
- Outcome
- Yield of cured leafe0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield of cured leaf was increased by all three factors in Expt 1”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Suckering increased cured-leaf yield in experiment 2.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- suckeringe0
- Outcome
- Yield of cured leafe2
- Direction
- increasede2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“by suckering only in Expt 2”
e1“by suckering only in Expt 2”
e2“Yield of cured leaf was increased by all three factors in Expt 1”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen and topping slightly decreased yield in experiment 2.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- N and toppinge0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both N and topping slightly decreased the yield in the latter experiment”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
A higher nitrogen rate significantly lowered quality.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- higher rate of Ne0
- Outcome
- Qualitye0
- Direction
- lowerede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Quality was significantly lowered by the higher rate of N”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Topping and suckering generally improved quality.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- topping and suckeringe0
- Outcome
- Qualitye2
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“generally improved by topping and suckering”
e1“generally improved by topping and suckering”
e2“Quality was significantly lowered by the higher rate of N”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher plant density increased cured-leaf yield by 9% in experiment 3.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- higher plant densitye0
- Outcome
- yield of cured leafe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 9e0
- Qualifier
- Expts 3e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of cured leaf was increased by the higher plant density, by 9 and 15%, and decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher plant density increased cured-leaf yield by 15% in experiment 4.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- higher plant densitye0
- Outcome
- yield of cured leafe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 15%e0
- Qualifier
- 4e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of cured leaf was increased by the higher plant density, by 9 and 15%, and decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher nitrogen decreased cured-leaf yield by 15% in experiment 3.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- higher dose of Ne0
- Outcome
- yield of cured leafe2
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 15e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
e1“decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
e2“The yield of cured leaf was increased by the higher plant density, by 9 and 15%, and decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher nitrogen decreased cured-leaf yield by 7% in experiment 4.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- higher dose of Ne0
- Outcome
- yield of cured leafe2
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 7%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
e1“decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
e2“The yield of cured leaf was increased by the higher plant density, by 9 and 15%, and decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Early suckering raised yield by 16% in experiment 3 and reduced it by 8% in experiment 4.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- Early suckeringe0
- Outcome
- yielde2
- Value
- 16%e0
- Qualifier
- harmful in Expt 4 (8%)e0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Early suckering was beneficial in Expt 3 (16%), but harmful in Expt 4 (8%).”
e1“Early suckering was beneficial in Expt 3 (16%), but harmful in Expt 4 (8%).”
e2“The yield of cured leaf was increased by the higher plant density, by 9 and 15%, and decreased by the higher dose of N, by 15 and 7%, in Expts 3 and 4, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher plant density improved leaf quality.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- higher plant densitye0
- Outcome
- Leaf qualitye0
- Direction
- improvede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaf quality was decreased by the higher rate of N, but improved by the higher plant density.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Sucker removal timing had no significant effect on yield or quality.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- Time of removal of suckerse0
- Outcome
- yield or qualitye0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Time of removal of suckers had no significant effect on yield or quality.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Unrestricted irrigation over all three phases gave the best yield and quality.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- irrigation was not limiting during all three phases of growthe0
- Outcome
- yield and qualitye0
- Direction
- beste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The best yield and quality were obtained when irrigation was not limiting during all three phases of growth.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Withholding irrigation in phase C cut yield by 44–50% in experiment 5.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- withholding irrigation during phase Ce0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 44–50%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“withholding irrigation during phase C reduced yield by 44–50%, and only 6%, in the two experiments, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
Claim · model-written summary
Withholding irrigation in phase C cut yield by 6% in experiment 6.
- Taxon
- tobaccoNicotiana tabacumt0
- Treatment
- withholding irrigation during phase Ce0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 6%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“withholding irrigation during phase C reduced yield by 44–50%, and only 6%, in the two experiments, respectively.”
t0“tobacco”
The same questions in other papers
density · quality: general · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →pruning · growth · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →pruning · quality: general · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
15 papers more in this group
See all 19 papers →density · yield · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →irrigation · yield · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →pruning · yield · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →nitrogen · growth · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 56 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
69 papers more in this group
See all 73 papers →irrigation · quality: general · Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)Results agree
13 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
10 papers more in this group
See all 14 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.