Abstract
Irrigation is a crucial practice that operators often perform empirically, relying on their own experience, especially in productive areas characterized by low technology agriculture (i.e. several parts of Mediterranean countries). One of the possible approach for proper irrigation scheduling is measuring the soil water potential, simple and easy to manage. The purpose of this research was to examine the effects of two different irrigation regimes (obtained by the use of tensiometers connected to a relay controller) on yield, fruit quality and water consumption of greenhouse tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L. cv Naxos) and cucumber (Cucumis sativus L., cv Sarig, in the first cropping cycle, and the local landrace ‘Mezzo lungo di Polignano’, in the second one) grown on a silty-clay soil in Mediterranean conditions. For each species, two tests (August-February and February-July cycle) were carried out in a plastic greenhouse-tunnel. Drip irrigation was adopted, with automated schedule based on tensiometer readings. Two water potential irrigation set-points were compared: -100 and -400 hPa for tomato and -100 and -300 hPa for cucumber, in both cycles. Yield (marketable and unmarketable) and quality traits of fruits (soluble solids, dry matter and titratable acidity) were determined. Water consumption was calculated at the end of each crop cycle. In the first cycle, the two water regimes did not affect the yield of tomato and cucumber. The cucumber irrigated at the lowest soil water potential set-point produced fruits with 8% higher dry matter. In the second cycle, the tomato irrigated at the potential of -400 hPa showed a 40% lower yield (mainly due to the lower fruit size) compared to that of plants irrigated at -100 hPa. However, the fruits of tomato plants irrigated at -400 hPa showed total soluble solids, dry matter and titratable acidity, respectively 41, 45 and 59% higher than plants irrigated at -100 hPa. In both crop cycles, a water saving of 35% and 46%, on average, for tomato and cucumber, respectively, was obtained using the lowest potential as irrigation set-point. Proper use of tensiometer could allow a better use of water resource. Selection of proper water potential set-points according to the cultivation season is crucial for satisfactory results. The positive effects of a controlled and moderate water stress on fruit quality should be taken into account.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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
First-cycle tomato yield was unaffected by water regime.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Treatment
- two water regimese0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the first cycle, the two water regimes did not affect the yield of tomato and cucumber”
Claim · model-written summary
First-cycle cucumber yield was unaffected by water regime.
- Taxon
- cucumber
Cucumis sativuse0 - Treatment
- two water regimese0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the first cycle, the two water regimes did not affect the yield of tomato and cucumber”
Claim · model-written summary
Cucumber at the lowest soil water potential set point had 8% higher fruit dry matter.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse0
- Treatment
- lowest soil water potential set-pointe0
- Outcome
- dry mattere0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 8%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The cucumber irrigated at the lowest soil water potential set-point produced fruits with 8% higher dry matter”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-cycle tomato at -400 hPa had 40% lower yield than at -100 hPa.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- -400 hPae0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Value
- 40%e0
- Comparator
- -100 hPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the tomato irrigated at the potential of -400 hPa showed a 40% lower yield (mainly due to the lower fruit size) compared to that of plants irrigated at -100 hPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-cycle tomato at -400 hPa had 41% higher total soluble solids than at -100 hPa.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- -400 hPae0
- Outcome
- total soluble solidse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 41e0
- Comparator
- -100 hPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the fruits of tomato plants irrigated at -400 hPa showed total soluble solids, dry matter and titratable acidity, respectively 41, 45 and 59% higher than plants irrigated at -100 hPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-cycle tomato at -400 hPa had 45% higher fruit dry matter than at -100 hPa.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- -400 hPae0
- Outcome
- dry mattere0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 45e0
- Comparator
- -100 hPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the fruits of tomato plants irrigated at -400 hPa showed total soluble solids, dry matter and titratable acidity, respectively 41, 45 and 59% higher than plants irrigated at -100 hPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Second-cycle tomato at -400 hPa had 59% higher titratable acidity than at -100 hPa.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- -400 hPae0
- Outcome
- titratable aciditye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 59%e0
- Comparator
- -100 hPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the fruits of tomato plants irrigated at -400 hPa showed total soluble solids, dry matter and titratable acidity, respectively 41, 45 and 59% higher than plants irrigated at -100 hPa”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower-potential irrigation saved 35% water for tomato across both cycles.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- lowest potential as irrigation set-pointe0
- Outcome
- water savinge0
- Direction
- savinge0
- Value
- 35%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In both crop cycles, a water saving of 35% and 46%, on average, for tomato and cucumber, respectively, was obtained using the lowest potential as irrigation set-point”
Claim · model-written summary
Lower-potential irrigation saved 46% water for cucumber across both cycles.
- Taxon
- cucumberCucumis sativuse0
- Treatment
- lowest potential as irrigation set-pointe0
- Outcome
- water savinge0
- Direction
- savinge0
- Value
- 46%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In both crop cycles, a water saving of 35% and 46%, on average, for tomato and cucumber, respectively, was obtained using the lowest potential as irrigation set-point”
The same questions in other papers
soil water · growth · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →irrigation · yield · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results
17 papers in the same direction as this paper · 53 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
67 papers more in this group
See all 71 papers →irrigation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
104 papers in the same direction as this paper · 239 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
340 papers more in this group
See all 344 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.