Abstract
Worldwide, a significant increase in watermelon (Citrullus lanatus [Thunb.] Matsum. & Nakai) growing areas has been registered in the last few years. In-row plant spacing has a significant effect on the growth and yield of watermelon, and can enhance competition for water and nutrients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of in-row plant spacing (1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 m) and arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM) fungi Glomus mosseae inoculations on watermelon growth and yield under field conditions during 2003, 2004, and 2005 year. In 2003, the main vine length, number of leaves, and number of lateral branches were increased quadratically as the in-row plant spacing increased from 1.0 to 2.5. With an increase in the in-row plant spacing the early yield of watermelon decreased in 2004, while the fruit number decreased in 2003 and 2004. The total yield and fruit number decreased with an increase in the in-row plant spacing in all 3 yr; however, the fruit mass increased at wider plant spacings in 2003. Mycorrhizal inoculation increased the main vine length and the number of lateral branches in 2003. Compared to non-mycorrhizal plants, mycorrhizal plants presented higher early yield in 2005 and a higher early fruit number in 2003 and 2005. Mycorrhizal inoculation increased total yield in 2005; however, the fruit weight was not affected by mycorrhizal inoculation during early or total harvest. In this study, an in-row plant spacing of 1.0 m provided the best early and total yield while maintaining high fruit weight. The growth and yield enhancement of watermelon due to mycorrhizal colonization was not consistent; therefore, mycorrhizal inoculation could not be recommended as a standard production practice.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 12
Claim · model-written summary
Wider spacing increased vine length, leaf number and lateral branches quadratically in 2003.
- Taxon
- Watermelon
Citrullus lanatust0 - Treatment
- in-row plant spacinge0
- Outcome
- main vine length, number of leaves, and number of lateral branchese0
- Direction
- increased quadraticallye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In 2003, the main vine length, number of leaves, and number of lateral branches were increased quadratically as the in-row plant spacing increased from 1.0 to 2.5.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Wider spacing decreased early yield in 2004.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatuse0
- Treatment
- in-row plant spacinge0
- Outcome
- early yielde0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With an increase in the in-row plant spacing the early yield of watermelon decreased in 2004”
Claim · model-written summary
Wider spacing decreased fruit number in 2003 and 2004.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- in-row plant spacinge1
- Outcome
- fruit numbere0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the fruit number decreased in 2003 and 2004”
e1“With an increase in the in-row plant spacing”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Wider spacing decreased total yield and fruit number in all three years.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- in-row plant spacinge0
- Outcome
- total yield and fruit numbere0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The total yield and fruit number decreased with an increase in the in-row plant spacing in all 3 yr”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit mass increased at wider spacings in 2003.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- wider plant spacingse0
- Outcome
- fruit masse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the fruit mass increased at wider plant spacings in 2003”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inoculation increased vine length and lateral branch number in 2003.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- Mycorrhizal inoculatione0
- Outcome
- main vine length and the number of lateral branchese0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mycorrhizal inoculation increased the main vine length and the number of lateral branches in 2003.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal plants had higher early yield in 2005.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal plantse0
- Outcome
- early yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- non-mycorrhizal plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to non-mycorrhizal plants, mycorrhizal plants presented higher early yield in 2005”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal plants had higher early fruit number in 2003 and 2005.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal plantse0
- Outcome
- early fruit numbere0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- non-mycorrhizal plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to non-mycorrhizal plants, mycorrhizal plants presented higher early yield in 2005 and a higher early fruit number in 2003 and 2005.”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inoculation increased total yield in 2005.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- Mycorrhizal inoculatione0
- Outcome
- total yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Mycorrhizal inoculation increased total yield in 2005”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
Mycorrhizal inoculation did not affect fruit weight.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- mycorrhizal inoculatione0
- Outcome
- fruit weighte0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the fruit weight was not affected by mycorrhizal inoculation during early or total harvest”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
A 1.0 m spacing gave the best early and total yield while maintaining high fruit weight.
- Taxon
- WatermelonCitrullus lanatust0
- Treatment
- in-row plant spacing of 1.0 me0
- Outcome
- best early and total yield while maintaining high fruit weighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“an in-row plant spacing of 1.0 m provided the best early and total yield while maintaining high fruit weight”
t0“Watermelon”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors did not recommend routine mycorrhizal inoculation because growth and yield benefits were inconsistent.
- Taxon
- watermelonCitrullus lanatuse0
- Outcome
- mycorrhizal inoculation could not be recommended as a standard production practicee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The growth and yield enhancement of watermelon due to mycorrhizal colonization was not consistent; therefore, mycorrhizal inoculation could not be recommended as a standard production practice.”
The same questions in other papers
density · growth · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →mycorrhiza · growth · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →density · yield · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →inoculation · growth · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →mycorrhiza · yield · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Results agree
5 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →inoculation · yield · Citrullus lanatus (watermelon)Results agree
8 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 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.