Paper · 1993 · HortScience

EFFECTS OF SEQUENTIAL FOLIAGE TOPPING ON YIELD OF TWO SWEETPOTATO CULTIVARS

P.P. David; C.K. Bonsi; E. Bonsi; et al.

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
0
citations
1
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

The effects of sequential foliage topping on two sweetpotato [Ipomoea batatas (L) Lam cvs Georgia Jet, TU-82-18921 cultivars were investigated in a field trial. Three initial foliage cuttings (15 cm cutting from the growing tip) were initialed at 45.60 and 75 days after planting (DAP). Each initial cutting date was followed by zero, one or two cuttings at biweekly intervals. Total storage root yields were not affected by cutting treatments regardless of the cultivar investigated. Both cultivars differed in their response in dry matter accumulation, while Georgia Jet was not affected by cutting treatments, TU-82-1892 accumulated less dry matter when foliage tips were removed twice during the growth cycle (75.90 DAP) compared to all other cutting treatments. The amount of foliage tips removed from each cultivar differed significantly over all treatment levels with Georgia Jet producing more foliage tips than TU-82-1892. However. production of foliage tips for both cultivars was greatest when foliage cutting was delayed until 75 DAP.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Sequential foliage topping did not affect total storage root yield of sweetpotato

Taxon
sweetpotatoIpomoea batatase0
Treatment
cutting treatmentse1
Outcome
Total storage root yieldse1
Direction
not affectede1

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two sweetpotato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 45–60 · show in text ↑
e1

“Total storage root yields were not affected by cutting treatments regardless of the cultivar investigated”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 378–483 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cutting treatments did not affect dry matter accumulation of the cultivar Georgia Jet

Taxon
sweetpotatoIpomoea batatase0
Material
Georgia Jete2
Treatment
cutting treatmentse2
Outcome
dry matter accumulatione2
Direction
not affectede2

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two sweetpotato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 45–60 · show in text ↑
e2

“Both cultivars differed in their response in dry matter accumulation, while Georgia Jet was not affected by cutting treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 485–611 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

TU-82-1892 accumulated less dry matter when foliage tips were removed twice than under all other cutting treatments

Taxon
sweetpotatoIpomoea batatase0
Material
TU-82-1892e3
Treatment
foliage tips were removed twicee3
Outcome
dry mattere3
Direction
accumulated lesse3
Qualifier
during the growth cycle (75.90 DAP)e3
Comparator
all other cutting treatmentse3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two sweetpotato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 45–60 · show in text ↑
e3

“TU-82-1892 accumulated less dry matter when foliage tips were removed twice during the growth cycle (75.90 DAP) compared to all other cutting treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 613–765 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Georgia Jet produced more foliage tips than TU-82-1892

Taxon
sweetpotatoIpomoea batatase0
Material
Georgia Jete4
Outcome
foliage tipse4
Direction
producing moree4
Comparator
TU-82-1892e4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two sweetpotato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 45–60 · show in text ↑
e4

“The amount of foliage tips removed from each cultivar differed significantly over all treatment levels with Georgia Jet producing more foliage tips than TU-82-1892”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 767–930 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliage tip production was greatest when foliage cutting was delayed until 75 days after planting

Taxon
sweetpotatoIpomoea batatase0
Treatment
foliage cutting was delayed until 75 DAPe5
Outcome
production of foliage tipse5
Direction
greateste5

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Ipomoea batatas
Ipomoea batatas · TaxonEarth100 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“two sweetpotato”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 45–60 · show in text ↑
e5

“production of foliage tips for both cultivars was greatest when foliage cutting was delayed until 75 DAP”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 941–1045 · show in text ↑

pruning · yield · Ipomoea batatas (sweet potato)Results differ

16 papers: 6 positive, 10 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 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.