Abstract
Black polyethylene as mulch is the most extended material among vegetable growers; however, photodegradable and biodegradable films have appeared as an alternative to conventional mulches due to the risk of the progressive contamination of soils. Reflective materials reflect back most of the incoming solar radiation, being recommended in areas characterized by high soil temperatures. We compared the effect of three mulches, black polyethylene, black biodegradable corn starch plastic and aluminized photodegradable plastic on a tomato crop in an open field.We measured mulch deterioration, soil temperature under mulches, tomato yield and fruit quality attributes (total soluble solids, firmness, dry weight, juice content and shape). Biodegradable mulch performed its function successfully and disappeared visually from the soil about three months after the crop was finished. Photodegradable mulch deteriorated prematurely and polyethylene film was practically intact at the end of season. Significant differences in mean soil temperature under mulches were observed (27.8ºC in biodegradable, 28.7ºC in aluminized and 31.8ºC in polyethylene), although they did not have a marked effect on the crop yield. Marketable yields were similar in both biodegradable and polyethylene mulches (9.82 and 8.66 kg m-2, respectively), and higher than those recorded in aluminized photodegradable mulch (6.85 kg m-2), which resulted in the highest sunscald in fruits. No effect on the fruit quality attributes was observed. Biodegradable plastic mulches could be a good alternative to the traditional plastic films, and aluminized photodegradable mulches seem not very advisable because they reduce marketable yield and could increase the incidence of sunscald.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Biodegradable mulch disappeared visually about three months after the crop finished.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicumt0 - Outcome
- disappeared visually from the soile0
- Value
- about three monthse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biodegradable mulch performed its function successfully and disappeared visually from the soil about three months after the crop was finished.”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Photodegradable mulch deteriorated prematurely.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- Photodegradable mulch deteriorated prematurelye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Photodegradable mulch deteriorated prematurely”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Polyethylene film remained practically intact at season end.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- polyethylene film was practically intacte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“polyethylene film was practically intact at the end of season.”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean soil temperature differed significantly under mulches, with biodegradable at 27.8ºC.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- biodegradablee0
- Outcome
- mean soil temperature under mulchese0
- Value
- 27.8ºCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Significant differences in mean soil temperature under mulches were observed (27.8ºC in biodegradable, 28.7ºC in aluminized and 31.8ºC in polyethylene)”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean soil temperature under aluminized mulch was 28.7ºC.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- aluminizede0
- Outcome
- mean soil temperature under mulchese0
- Value
- 28.7ºCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean soil temperature under mulches were observed (27.8ºC in biodegradable, 28.7ºC in aluminized and 31.8ºC in polyethylene)”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean soil temperature under polyethylene mulch was 31.8ºC.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- polyethylenee0
- Outcome
- mean soil temperature under mulchese0
- Value
- 31.8ºCe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“mean soil temperature under mulches were observed (27.8ºC in biodegradable, 28.7ºC in aluminized and 31.8ºC in polyethylene)”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil temperature differences had no marked effect on tomato yield.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- mean soil temperaturet1
- Outcome
- crop yielde0
- Direction
- did not have a marked effecte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“although they did not have a marked effect on the crop yield.”
t0“tomato”
t1“Significant differences in mean soil temperature under mulches were observed”
Claim · model-written summary
Biodegradable mulch produced 9.82 kg m-2 marketable yield.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- biodegradablee0
- Outcome
- Marketable yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 9.82e0
- Comparator
- aluminized photodegradable mulche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Marketable yields were similar in both biodegradable and polyethylene mulches (9.82 and 8.66 kg m-2, respectively), and higher than those recorded in aluminized photodegradable mulch (6.85 kg m-2)”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Polyethylene mulch produced 8.66 kg m-2 marketable yield.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- polyethylenee0
- Outcome
- Marketable yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 8.66 kg m-2e0
- Comparator
- aluminized photodegradable mulche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Marketable yields were similar in both biodegradable and polyethylene mulches (9.82 and 8.66 kg m-2, respectively), and higher than those recorded in aluminized photodegradable mulch (6.85 kg m-2)”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Aluminized photodegradable mulch produced 6.85 kg m-2 marketable yield.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- aluminized photodegradable mulche0
- Outcome
- Marketable yieldst1
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 6.85 kg m-2e0
- Comparator
- biodegradable and polyethylene mulchest1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“higher than those recorded in aluminized photodegradable mulch (6.85 kg m-2)”
t0“tomato”
t1“Marketable yields were similar in both biodegradable and polyethylene mulches”
Claim · model-written summary
Aluminized photodegradable mulch had the highest fruit sunscald.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- aluminized photodegradable mulcht1
- Outcome
- sunscald in fruitse0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“which resulted in the highest sunscald in fruits.”
t0“tomato”
t1“those recorded in aluminized photodegradable mulch (6.85 kg m-2)”
Claim · model-written summary
Mulches had no observed effect on fruit quality attributes.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Treatment
- three mulchest1
- Outcome
- fruit quality attributese0
- Direction
- No effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“No effect on the fruit quality attributes was observed.”
t0“tomato”
t1“We compared the effect of three mulches”
Claim · model-written summary
Biodegradable mulch could be an alternative to traditional plastic films.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- Biodegradable plastic mulchese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Biodegradable plastic mulches could be a good alternative to the traditional plastic films”
t0“tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Aluminized photodegradable mulch is not advised because it reduces marketable yield and may increase sunscald.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicumt0
- Outcome
- aluminized photodegradable mulchese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“aluminized photodegradable mulches seem not very advisable because they reduce marketable yield and could increase the incidence of sunscald.”
t0“tomato”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · quality: grain · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
7 papers more in this group
See all 11 papers →mulching · quality: postharvest · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 44 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
51 papers more in this group
See all 55 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.