Abstract
Abstract Field experiments were conducted for 3 years from 2000 to 2002 to assess proportional crop yield differences obtained under conventional deficit irrigation (CDI) and partial root zone irrigation (PRI) practices, compared with full irrigation (FULL) where plant water requirements were fully met. The experimental crops included vegetables (tomato and pepper), field crops (maize and cotton) and citrus. The fruit yield of greenhouse‐grown tomato with FULL irrigation was higher than with PRI (7–22% lower) but was not significantly different. The PRI treatments had 7–10% additional tomato yield over CDI receiving the same amount of water. The yield of pepper, however, decreased in proportion to the level of irrigation deficit with no increase of irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE). No seed yield decrease was evident for cotton with the deficit treatments (PRI and CDI) compared with FULL irrigation. Similarly, the PRI treatment did not give any yield benefit for maize compared with CDI. The ranking of fruit yields of mandarin, FULL > PRI > CDI, was the same as that of other crops; however, the differences were not significant. Although the deficit treatments (PRI and CDI) had as high as 39% increase in IWUE, compared with FULL treatment, some adverse effects on fruit quality were evident such as smaller size of fruits under the deficit treatments.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato fruit yield under PRI was 7–22% lower than FULL, without a significant difference.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Treatment
- PRIe0
- Outcome
- fruit yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 7–22%e0
- Comparator
- FULL irrigatione0
- Setting
- greenhouse‐growne0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fruit yield of greenhouse‐grown tomato with FULL irrigation was higher than with PRI (7–22% lower) but was not significantly different”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato yield under PRI exceeded CDI by 7–10% with the same water amount.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- PRI treatmentse0
- Outcome
- tomato yielde0
- Direction
- additionale0
- Value
- 7–10%e0
- Qualifier
- same amount of watere0
- Comparator
- CDIe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The PRI treatments had 7–10% additional tomato yield over CDI receiving the same amount of water”
Claim · model-written summary
Pepper yield fell as irrigation deficit increased.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of pepper, however, decreased in proportion to the level of irrigation deficit”
Claim · model-written summary
Pepper irrigation water use efficiency did not increase with deficit irrigation.
Verbatim
e0“The yield of pepper, however, decreased in proportion to the level of irrigation deficit with no increase of irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE)”
e1“compared with full irrigation (FULL)”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton seed yield did not decrease under PRI or CDI relative to FULL.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Treatment
- deficit treatments (PRI and CDI)e0
- Outcome
- seed yielde0
- Direction
- No seed yield decreasee0
- Comparator
- FULL irrigatione0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No seed yield decrease was evident for cotton with the deficit treatments (PRI and CDI) compared with FULL irrigation”
Claim · model-written summary
Maize yield had no benefit with PRI compared with CDI.
- Treatment
- PRI treatmente0
- Outcome
- yield benefite0
- Direction
- did not give any yield benefite0
- Comparator
- CDIe0
Zea maysOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the PRI treatment did not give any yield benefit for maize compared with CDI”
Claim · model-written summary
Mandarin fruit yield ranked FULL above PRI above CDI, with nonsignificant differences.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“The ranking of fruit yields of mandarin, FULL > PRI > CDI, was the same as that of other crops; however, the differences were not significant”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation increased IWUE by as much as 39% relative to FULL.
- Treatment
- deficit treatments (PRI and CDI)e0
- Outcome
- IWUEe0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Value
- 39%e0
- Comparator
- FULL treatmente0
CitrusOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the deficit treatments (PRI and CDI) had as high as 39% increase in IWUE, compared with FULL treatment”
e1“vegetables (tomato and pepper), field crops (maize and cotton) and citrus”
Claim · model-written summary
Deficit irrigation produced smaller fruits.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“smaller size of fruits under the deficit treatments”
e1“vegetables (tomato and pepper), field crops (maize and cotton) and citrus”
e2“compared with FULL treatment”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · physiology: water · CitrusPositive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →irrigation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
238 papers in the same direction as this paper · 98 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- negative
340 papers more in this group
See all 344 papers →irrigation · yield · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
94 papers in the same direction as this paper · 304 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
395 papers more in this group
See all 399 papers →irrigation · yield · Zea mays (maize)Positive and negative results
224 papers in the same direction as this paper · 791 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- negative
- positive
1,012 papers more in this group
See all 1,016 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.