Abstract
SummaryFour discrete and continuous humidity treatments (0.1, 0.4, 0.7 and 1.1 kPa vapour pressure deficit) were applied to plants of three chrysanthemum cultivars (Snowdon, Pink Gin and Snapper) growing in daylit, controlled environment cabinets in autumn and spring experiments to determine effects on growth and flowering. There was some reduction in total leaf area and leaf dry weight in the highest humidity treatment but, overall, effects on stem and leaf growth were slight. Effects of high humidity on flowering were more marked, with estimated maximum delays of 4–5 d in flower development and reductions in flower dry weight at harvest. Visual appearance was not impaired in any of the treatments. It was concluded that the chrysanthemum is relatively insensitive to humidity within the range tested and that it is unlikely that this environmental variable is of major consequence in commercial growing during the winter period.
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 7
Claim · model-written summary
The highest humidity treatment slightly reduced total leaf area and leaf dry weight in chrysanthemum.
- Taxon
- chrysanthemum
.jpeg?width=60)
Chrysanthemume0 - Treatment
- highest humidity treatmente1
- Outcome
- total leaf area and leaf dry weighte1
- Direction
- reductione1
- Setting
- daylit, controlled environment cabinetse2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpeg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“plants of three chrysanthemum cultivars (Snowdon, Pink Gin and Snapper)”
e1“There was some reduction in total leaf area and leaf dry weight in the highest humidity treatment”
e2“growing in daylit, controlled environment cabinets in autumn and spring experiments”
Claim · model-written summary
Overall effects of humidity treatments on chrysanthemum stem and leaf growth were slight.
- Taxon
- chrysanthemumChrysanthemume2
- Treatment
- humidity treatmentse0
- Outcome
- effects on stem and leaf growthe1
- Direction
- slighte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Four discrete and continuous humidity treatments (0.1, 0.4, 0.7 and 1.1 kPa vapour pressure deficit)”
e1“overall, effects on stem and leaf growth were slight”
e2“plants of three chrysanthemum cultivars (Snowdon, Pink Gin and Snapper)”
Claim · model-written summary
High humidity delayed chrysanthemum flower development by an estimated maximum of 4–5 days.
- Taxon
- chrysanthemumChrysanthemume1
- Treatment
- high humiditye0
- Outcome
- flower developmente0
- Direction
- delayse0
- Value
- 4–5 de0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effects of high humidity on flowering were more marked, with estimated maximum delays of 4–5 d in flower development and reductions in flower dry weight at harvest”
e1“plants of three chrysanthemum cultivars (Snowdon, Pink Gin and Snapper)”
Claim · model-written summary
High humidity reduced chrysanthemum flower dry weight at harvest.
- Taxon
- chrysanthemumChrysanthemume1
- Treatment
- high humiditye0
- Outcome
- flower dry weight at harveste0
- Direction
- reductionse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Effects of high humidity on flowering were more marked, with estimated maximum delays of 4–5 d in flower development and reductions in flower dry weight at harvest”
e1“plants of three chrysanthemum cultivars (Snowdon, Pink Gin and Snapper)”
Claim · model-written summary
Visual appearance of chrysanthemum was not impaired by any of the humidity treatments.
- Taxon
- chrysanthemumChrysanthemume1
- Outcome
- Visual appearancee0
- Direction
- not impairede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Visual appearance was not impaired in any of the treatments”
e1“plants of three chrysanthemum cultivars (Snowdon, Pink Gin and Snapper)”
Claim · model-written summary
Chrysanthemum is relatively insensitive to humidity within the range tested.
- Taxon
- chrysanthemumChrysanthemume0
- Outcome
- insensitive to humiditye0
- Qualifier
- within the range testede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the chrysanthemum is relatively insensitive to humidity within the range tested”
Claim · model-written summary
Humidity is unlikely to be of major consequence in commercial chrysanthemum growing during winter.
- Taxon
- chrysanthemumChrysanthemume0
- Outcome
- major consequence in commercial growinge1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the chrysanthemum is relatively insensitive to humidity within the range tested”
e1“it is unlikely that this environmental variable is of major consequence in commercial growing during the winter period”
The same questions in other papers
humidity · growth · ChrysanthemumResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
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.