Abstract
From April to October in 2004, amicro-plot epxeriment was conducted in the semiarid area of Laizhou to study the effects of irrigation with mariculture wasterwater blended with slightly saline ground water on growth and yields of Helianthus tuberosus L. The results showed that the irrigation with fresh water could remarkably hasten the stem growth, but the stem height of other treatments were restrained due to water or salt stress. The stem width of 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was the largest, being 3.0 cm and 2.97 cm respectively; that of CK1, CK2 and 1∶2 treatment was 2.90, 2.83 and 2.73 cm, respectively; and that of 1∶1 treatment was the smallest, being 2.63 cm. The abovegrouned biomass of CK1 reached the highest value of 2.92 kg/plant; that of CK2 was the next; and that of 1∶1, 1∶2, 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was decreased by 26.4%, 29.1%, 21.6% and 17.5% respectively, when compared with CK1. The underground biomass of 1∶4 treatment was 0.623 kg/plant; that of CK2 was the next; and that of 1∶1 treatment was the lowest, being 0.368 kg/plant. Therefore, water stress could accelerate the growth of stems, leaves and roots of Helianthus tuberosus L., but restrain the growth of tubers. Using low concentration of maricultwre wasteuater blended with slightly saline water to irrigate Helianthus tuberosus L. could improe dry matter acumulation of tubers, thus achieving high yields.
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 20
Claim · model-written summary
Fresh-water irrigation hastened stem growth.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.
.jpg?width=60)
Helianthus tuberosust0 - Treatment
- irrigation with fresh watere0
- Outcome
- stem growthe0
- Direction
- hastene0
- Setting
- Laizhout0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“the irrigation with fresh water could remarkably hasten the stem growth”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L. in semiarid area of Laizhou”
Claim · model-written summary
Water or salt stress restrained stem height in other treatments.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- other treatmentse0
- Outcome
- stem heighte0
- Direction
- restrainede0
- Qualifier
- water or salt stresse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the stem height of other treatments were restrained due to water or salt stress”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶3 treatment produced stem width of 3.0 cm.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶3e0
- Outcome
- stem widthe0
- Direction
- largeste0
- Value
- 3.0 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The stem width of 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was the largest, being 3.0 cm and 2.97 cm respectively”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶4 treatment produced stem width of 2.97 cm.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶4e0
- Outcome
- stem widthe0
- Direction
- largeste0
- Value
- 2.97 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The stem width of 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was the largest, being 3.0 cm and 2.97 cm respectively”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
CK1 stem width was 2.90 cm.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- CK1e0
- Outcome
- stem widthe1
- Value
- 2.90e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of CK1, CK2 and 1∶2 treatment was 2.90, 2.83 and 2.73 cm, respectively”
e1“The stem width”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
CK2 stem width was 2.83 cm.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- CK2e0
- Outcome
- stem widthe1
- Value
- 2.83e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of CK1, CK2 and 1∶2 treatment was 2.90, 2.83 and 2.73 cm, respectively”
e1“The stem width”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶2 treatment stem width was 2.73 cm.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶2e0
- Outcome
- stem widthe1
- Value
- 2.73 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of CK1, CK2 and 1∶2 treatment was 2.90, 2.83 and 2.73 cm, respectively”
e1“The stem width”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶1 treatment had the smallest stem width, 2.63 cm.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶1e0
- Outcome
- stem widthe1
- Direction
- smalleste0
- Value
- 2.63 cme0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of 1∶1 treatment was the smallest, being 2.63 cm”
e1“The stem width”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
CK1 had the highest aboveground biomass, 2.92 kg per plant.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- CK1e0
- Outcome
- abovegrouned biomasse0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Value
- 2.92 kg/plante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The abovegrouned biomass of CK1 reached the highest value of 2.92 kg/plant”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
CK2 ranked next in aboveground biomass.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- CK2e0
- Outcome
- abovegrouned biomasse0
- Direction
- nexte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The abovegrouned biomass of CK1 reached the highest value of 2.92 kg/plant; that of CK2 was the next”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶1 treatment decreased aboveground biomass by 26.4% versus CK1.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶1e0
- Outcome
- abovegrouned biomasse1
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 26.4%e0
- Comparator
- CK1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of 1∶1, 1∶2, 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was decreased by 26.4%, 29.1%, 21.6% and 17.5% respectively, when compared with CK1”
e1“The abovegrouned biomass”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶2 treatment decreased aboveground biomass by 29.1% versus CK1.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶2e0
- Outcome
- abovegrouned biomasse1
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 29.1%e0
- Comparator
- CK1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of 1∶1, 1∶2, 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was decreased by 26.4%, 29.1%, 21.6% and 17.5% respectively, when compared with CK1”
e1“The abovegrouned biomass”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶3 treatment decreased aboveground biomass by 21.6% versus CK1.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶3e0
- Outcome
- abovegrouned biomasse1
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 21.6%e0
- Comparator
- CK1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of 1∶1, 1∶2, 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was decreased by 26.4%, 29.1%, 21.6% and 17.5% respectively, when compared with CK1”
e1“The abovegrouned biomass”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶4 treatment decreased aboveground biomass by 17.5% versus CK1.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶4e0
- Outcome
- abovegrouned biomasse1
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Value
- 17.5%e0
- Comparator
- CK1e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of 1∶1, 1∶2, 1∶3 and 1∶4 treatments was decreased by 26.4%, 29.1%, 21.6% and 17.5% respectively, when compared with CK1”
e1“The abovegrouned biomass”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶4 treatment yielded 0.623 kg per plant underground biomass.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶4e0
- Outcome
- underground biomasse0
- Value
- 0.623 kg/plante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The underground biomass of 1∶4 treatment was 0.623 kg/plant”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
CK2 ranked next in underground biomass.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- CK2e0
- Outcome
- underground biomasse0
- Direction
- nexte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The underground biomass of 1∶4 treatment was 0.623 kg/plant; that of CK2 was the next”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The 1∶1 treatment had the lowest underground biomass, 0.368 kg per plant.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosust0
- Treatment
- 1∶1e0
- Outcome
- underground biomasse1
- Direction
- loweste0
- Value
- 0.368 kg/plante0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“that of 1∶1 treatment was the lowest, being 0.368 kg/plant”
e1“The underground biomass”
t0“Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors concluded that water stress accelerated stem, leaf and root growth.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosuse0
- Treatment
- water stresse0
- Outcome
- growth of stems, leaves and rootse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water stress could accelerate the growth of stems, leaves and roots of Helianthus tuberosus L.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors concluded that water stress restrained tuber growth.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosuse0
- Treatment
- water stresse0
- Outcome
- growth of tuberse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water stress could accelerate the growth of stems, leaves and roots of Helianthus tuberosus L., but restrain the growth of tubers”
Claim · model-written summary
Low-concentration mariculture wastewater blended with slightly saline water could improve tuber dry matter and yield.
- Taxon
- Helianthus tuberosus L.Helianthus tuberosuse0
- Outcome
- Using low concentration of maricultwre wasteuater blended with slightly saline water to irrigate Helianthus tuberosus L.e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Using low concentration of maricultwre wasteuater blended with slightly saline water to irrigate Helianthus tuberosus L. could improe dry matter acumulation of tubers, thus achieving high yields.”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · growth · Helianthus tuberosus (Jerusalem artichoke)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
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.