Paper · 2011 · Journal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science

Nitrogen‐use efficiency traits of mini‐watermelon in response to grafting and nitrogen‐fertilization doses

Giuseppe Colla; Youssef Rouphael; Cristina Mirabelli; et al.

11
claims
33
verbatim quotes
94
citations
2
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Abstract Two experiments were conducted to study the effect of grafting on nitrogen‐use efficiency (NUE) in mini‐watermelon plants. In the first study, mini‐watermelon plants ( Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa) either ungrafted or grafted onto Macis, Vita ( Lagenaria siceraria [Mol.] Standl.), PS1313, and RP15 ( Cucurbita maxima Duchesne × Cucurbita moschata Duchesne) rootstocks grown in hydroponics were compared in terms of shoot dry biomass, leaf area, root‐to‐shoot ratio, SPAD index, shoot N uptake, and nitrate reductase (NR) activity 40 d after transplantation in response to nitrate concentration in the nutrient solution (0.5, 2.5, 5, 10, 15, or 20 mM of NO $ _3^- $ ). In the second experiment, the suitability of a selected rootstock with high NUE (Vita) to improve crop performance and NUE of grafted mini‐watermelon plants was evaluated under field conditions. In the hydroponic experiment mini‐watermelon grafted onto Vita rootstock needed the lowest nitrate concentration (1.31 mM of NO 3 ) in the nutrient solution to reach half maximum shoot dry weight. Total leaf area, SPAD index, and shoot N uptake increased in response to an increase of N concentration in the nutrient solution. At 2.5 mM NO $ _3^- $ , mini‐watermelon grafted on either Vita or RP15 had the highest NR activity whereas no significant difference was observed at 10 mM NO $ _3^- $ . The open‐field study indicated that increasing N‐fertilization rates from 0 to 100 kg ha –1 improved total and marketable yields of mini‐watermelon plants while decreasing NUE. When averaged over N levels, the marketable yield, NUE, N‐uptake efficiency, and N‐utilization efficiency were significantly higher by 39%, 38%, 21%, and 17%, respectively, in Minirossa grafted onto Vita compared to ungrafted Minirossa plants. Therefore, grafting mini‐watermelon plants onto selected rootstocks can be used as a quick and effective method for improving productivity and NUE.

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

Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mini-watermelon grafted onto Vita rootstock needed the lowest nitrate concentration, 1.31 mM of NO3, to reach half maximum shoot dry weight.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Treatment
grafted onto Vita rootstocke1
Outcome
nitrate concentratione1
Direction
loweste1
Value
1.31 mM of NO 3e1
Qualifier
to reach half maximum shoot dry weighte1

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e1

“grafted onto Vita rootstock needed the lowest nitrate concentration (1.31 mM of NO 3 ) in the nutrient solution to reach half maximum shoot dry weight”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 948–1098 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total leaf area, SPAD index and shoot N uptake increased with increasing N concentration in the nutrient solution.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Treatment
an increase of N concentration in the nutrient solutione2
Outcome
Total leaf area, SPAD index, and shoot N uptakee2
Direction
increasede2

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e2

“Total leaf area, SPAD index, and shoot N uptake increased in response to an increase of N concentration in the nutrient solution”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1100–1228 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting on Vita or RP15 gave the highest nitrate reductase activity at 2.5 mM nitrate.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Treatment
grafted on either Vita or RP15e3
Outcome
NR activitye3
Direction
higheste3
Qualifier
2.5 mMe4

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e3

“grafted on either Vita or RP15 had the highest NR activity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1270–1328 · show in text ↑
e4

“At 2.5 mM NO $ _3^- $”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1230–1251 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

No significant difference in NR activity was observed at 10 mM nitrate.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Treatment
10 mMe5
Outcome
NR activitye3
Direction
no significant differencee5

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e3

“grafted on either Vita or RP15 had the highest NR activity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1270–1328 · show in text ↑
e5

“no significant difference was observed at 10 mM”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1337–1384 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing N-fertilization from 0 to 100 kg ha –1 improved total and marketable yields.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Treatment
0 to 100 kg ha –1e6
Outcome
total and marketable yieldse6
Direction
improvede6

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e6

“from 0 to 100 kg ha –1 improved total and marketable yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1468–1527 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing N-fertilization from 0 to 100 kg ha –1 decreased nitrogen-use efficiency.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Treatment
0 to 100 kg ha –1e6
Outcome
NUEe7
Direction
decreasinge7

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e6

“from 0 to 100 kg ha –1 improved total and marketable yields”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1468–1527 · show in text ↑
e7

“while decreasing NUE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1554–1574 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting onto Vita gave a 39% higher marketable yield than ungrafted Minirossa, averaged over N levels.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Material
Minirossae2
Treatment
grafted onto Vitae2
Outcome
marketable yielde3
Direction
highere1
Value
39%e1
Comparator
ungrafted Minirossa plantse2

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e1

“significantly higher by 39%, 38%, 21%, and 17%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1687–1747 · show in text ↑
e2

“Minirossa grafted onto Vita compared to ungrafted Minirossa plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1752–1818 · show in text ↑
e3

“the marketable yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1605–1625 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting onto Vita gave a 38% higher NUE than ungrafted Minirossa, averaged over N levels.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Material
Minirossae2
Treatment
grafted onto Vitae2
Outcome
NUEe3
Direction
highere1
Value
38%e1
Comparator
ungrafted Minirossa plantse2

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e1

“significantly higher by 39%, 38%, 21%, and 17%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1687–1747 · show in text ↑
e2

“Minirossa grafted onto Vita compared to ungrafted Minirossa plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1752–1818 · show in text ↑
e3

“the marketable yield, NUE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1605–1630 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting onto Vita gave a 21% higher N-uptake efficiency than ungrafted Minirossa, averaged over N levels.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Material
Minirossae2
Treatment
grafted onto Vitae2
Outcome
N‐uptake efficiencye3
Direction
highere1
Value
21%e1
Comparator
ungrafted Minirossa plantse2

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e1

“significantly higher by 39%, 38%, 21%, and 17%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1687–1747 · show in text ↑
e2

“Minirossa grafted onto Vita compared to ungrafted Minirossa plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1752–1818 · show in text ↑
e3

“N‐uptake efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1632–1651 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting onto Vita gave a 17% higher N-utilization efficiency than ungrafted Minirossa, averaged over N levels.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Material
Minirossae2
Treatment
grafted onto Vitae2
Outcome
N‐utilization efficiencye3
Direction
highere1
Value
17%e1
Comparator
ungrafted Minirossa plantse2

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e1

“significantly higher by 39%, 38%, 21%, and 17%, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1687–1747 · show in text ↑
e2

“Minirossa grafted onto Vita compared to ungrafted Minirossa plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1752–1818 · show in text ↑
e3

“N‐utilization efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1657–1681 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting mini-watermelon onto selected rootstocks can be used as a quick and effective method for improving productivity and NUE.

Taxon
Citrullus lanatusCitrullus lanatuse0
Outcome
productivity and NUEe1

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

Citrullus lanatus
Citrullus lanatus · TaxonKumon · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Citrullus lanatus [Thumb.] Matsum. and Nakai cv. Minirossa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 177–235 · show in text ↑
e1

“can be used as a quick and effective method for improving productivity and NUE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1888–1966 · show in text ↑

grafting · quality: postharvest · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Positive and negative results

23 papers: 22 positive, 1 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

19 papers more in this group

See all 23 papers →

grafting · nutrient: efficiency · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 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.