Abstract
ABSTRACT In 1997, three tillage/mulch pepper production systems were compared on raised beds at the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (BARC), MD, and at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Kentland Agricultural Research Farm (KARF), Blacksburg, VA. The tillage/mulch treatments were hairy vetch (Vicia vlllosa Roth) mulch, no tillage (HVNT), black polyethylene in which the beds were rototilled and reformed before transplanting the peppers (BPT), and bare soil, no tillage (BSNT). ‘Camelot’ bell peppers were transplanted between late May and early June in double rows. Treatments BPT and BSNT received N at 224 kg.ha−1 in six applications on a sandy loam soil at BARC, while less N (78 kg.ha−') was applied in two early applications on a fine-textured loam soil at KARF. Vetch biomass in the HVNT treatment was estimated at 9.7 t.ha−1 at BARC and 5.4 t.ha−1 at KARF with a N content of 320 and 194 kg.ha−1 respectively. Six to nine harvests were made and fruit at each harvest were graded. Yields were high in all treatments in both sites. At each site, fruit maturity was earliest in the BPT and latest in the HVNT treatment; average fruit fresh mass was similar in all three treatments, and was highest early in the harvest season and declined with later harvests. There were no significant differences in marketable yield or fruit fresh mass among the three treatments at BARC. Pepper plants in the HVNT treatments at BARC were significantly taller than those in the other two treatments. Leaf chlorophyll concentration was highest in plants grown in BPT and lowest in the BSNT treatment. In contrast to BARC, pepper yield was significantly higher with BPT than with HVNT or BSNT at KARF. Higher soil temperature under BPT and increased N leaching in the BSNT and HVNT treatments possibly accounted for higher yield in BPT at KARF and earliness with BPT at both sites.
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
Marketable yield and fruit fresh mass did not differ significantly among the three tillage/mulch treatments at BARC.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e0“In 1997, three tillage/mulch pepper production systems were compared on raised beds”
e1“There were no significant differences in marketable yield or fruit fresh mass among the three treatments at BARC”
Claim · model-written summary
Pepper plants in the HVNT treatment were significantly taller at BARC than in the other two treatments.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e2“Pepper plants in the HVNT treatments at BARC were significantly taller than those in the other two treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Leaf chlorophyll concentration was highest in plants grown under BPT and lowest under BSNT.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e3“Leaf chlorophyll concentration was highest in plants grown in BPT and lowest in the BSNT treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit maturity was earliest under BPT and latest under HVNT.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e4“fruit maturity was earliest in the BPT and latest in the HVNT treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Average fruit fresh mass was similar in all three tillage/mulch treatments.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e0“In 1997, three tillage/mulch pepper production systems were compared on raised beds”
e5“average fruit fresh mass was similar in all three treatments, and was highest early in the harvest season and declined with later harvests”
Claim · model-written summary
Average fruit fresh mass was highest early in the harvest season and declined with later harvests.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e5“average fruit fresh mass was similar in all three treatments, and was highest early in the harvest season and declined with later harvests”
Claim · model-written summary
Pepper yield was significantly higher under BPT than under HVNT or BSNT at KARF.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e6“In contrast to BARC, pepper yield was significantly higher with BPT than with HVNT or BSNT at KARF”
Claim · model-written summary
Yields were high in all treatments at both sites.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e7“Yields were high in all treatments in both sites”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher soil temperature under BPT and increased N leaching under BSNT and HVNT possibly accounted for higher yield under BPT at KARF and earlier maturity under BPT at both sites.
Verbatim
t0“Bell Pepper”
e0“Higher soil temperature under BPT and increased N leaching in the BSNT and HVNT treatments possibly accounted for higher yield in BPT at KARF and earliness with BPT at both sites”
The same questions in other papers
tillage · growth · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
tillage · quality: postharvest · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
mulching · growth · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →mulching · quality: postharvest · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →transplanting · yield · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- negative
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 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.