Paper · 2018 · VEGETABLE CROPS OF RUSSIA

APPLICATION RESULTS OF CUCUMBER GRAFTING ON DIFFERENT ROOTSTOSKS OF PUMPKIN

G. S. Martirosyan

13
claims
25
verbatim quotes
1
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

At present it is very actual in vegetable growing the development of highly effective and ecologically safe methods for increasing yields and plant resistance to unfavorable growth conditions. One of these methods is grafting. The goal of the study was to learn the influence of the rootstock on the characteristics of the growth, development and yield of cucumber. Research was conducted in 2015-2016 in greenhouse in spring-summer period in Armenia. As a scions was used cucumber variety Nazrvan, which was grafted on 5 pumpkin rootstocks (VI033637, VI03338, VI03364, VI040903, VI056328) from the collection of the World Vegetable Center (WVC). The grafting was carried out according to the standard method. When the VI033637 rootstock was used, flowering started 5 days earlier than the ungrafted plants, while when grafted on VI040903, the fruits ripened 6.2 days earlier. High increase of early yield (33.3%) received when used both above mentioned rootstocks. VI033638 – 4.1 kg/m2 and VI033664- 9.9 kg/m2 samples provided high increase of the total yield. For all the types of rootstocks the grafted plants of cucumber surpass the non-grafted ones by height from 4.7 % to 21.7%, by marketability of fruits from 5% to 14% and by fruit mass from 15 gr to 45 g. At the beginning of fruit-setting of cucumber plants the number of female flowers increased from 27% to 63% depending on the rootstock sample. The amount of dry substances in all grafted plants has increased by 4.4-8.8% and the amount of vitamin C by 1.8-9.2%. As a result of research carried out by us, perspective rootstocks (VIO33638 and VIO33664) are identified by a set of economically valuable characteristics which are recommended for applying in the further investigation and breeding activities and in production of grafted plants.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 13

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VI033637 grafting advanced flowering by five days.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Material
VI033637e1
Treatment
VI033637 rootstocke1
Outcome
floweringe1
Direction
earliere1
Value
5 dayse1
Comparator
ungrafted plantse1

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield of cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 347–364 · show in text ↑
e1

“When the VI033637 rootstock was used, flowering started 5 days earlier than the ungrafted plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 710–806 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VI040903 grafting advanced fruit ripening by 6.2 days.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
grafted on VI040903e1
Outcome
fruits ripenede1
Direction
earliere1
Value
6.2 dayse1

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield of cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 347–364 · show in text ↑
e1

“when grafted on VI040903, the fruits ripened 6.2 days earlier”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 814–875 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VI033637 increased early yield by 33.3%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
VI033637 rootstocke1
Outcome
early yielde2
Direction
increasee2
Value
33.3%e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield of cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 347–364 · show in text ↑
e1

“VI033637 rootstock”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 719–737 · show in text ↑
e2

“High increase of early yield (33.3%) received when used both above mentioned rootstocks”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 877–964 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VI040903 increased early yield by 33.3%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
grafted on VI040903e1
Outcome
early yielde2
Direction
increasee2
Value
33.3%e2

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield of cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 347–364 · show in text ↑
e1

“grafted on VI040903”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 819–838 · show in text ↑
e2

“High increase of early yield (33.3%) received when used both above mentioned rootstocks”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 877–964 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VI033638 increased total yield to 4.1 kg/m2.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
VI033638e1
Outcome
total yielde1
Direction
increasee1
Value
4.1 kg/m2e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield of cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 347–364 · show in text ↑
e1

“VI033638 – 4.1 kg/m2 and VI033664- 9.9 kg/m2 samples provided high increase of the total yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1060 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

VI033664 increased total yield to 9.9 kg/m2.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
VI033664e1
Outcome
total yielde1
Direction
increasee1
Value
9.9 kg/m2e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“yield of cucumber”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 347–364 · show in text ↑
e1

“VI033638 – 4.1 kg/m2 and VI033664- 9.9 kg/m2 samples provided high increase of the total yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 966–1060 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting increased cucumber plant height by 4.7% to 21.7%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
graftede0
Outcome
heighte0
Direction
surpasse0
Value
4.7 % to 21.7%e0
Comparator
non-grafted onese0

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“grafted plants of cucumber surpass the non-grafted ones by height from 4.7 % to 21.7%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1098–1183 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting increased fruit marketability by 5% to 14%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
graftede0
Outcome
marketability of fruitse0
Direction
surpasse0
Value
5% to 14%e0
Comparator
non-grafted onese0

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“grafted plants of cucumber surpass the non-grafted ones by height from 4.7 % to 21.7%, by marketability of fruits from 5% to 14%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1098–1226 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting increased fruit mass by 15 gr to 45 g.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
graftede0
Outcome
fruit masse0
Direction
surpasse0
Value
15 gr to 45 ge0
Comparator
non-grafted onese0

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“grafted plants of cucumber surpass the non-grafted ones by height from 4.7 % to 21.7%, by marketability of fruits from 5% to 14% and by fruit mass from 15 gr to 45 g”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1098–1263 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The number of female flowers increased by 27% to 63% at fruit setting.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Outcome
number of female flowerse0
Direction
increasede0
Value
27% to 63%e0

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At the beginning of fruit-setting of cucumber plants the number of female flowers increased from 27% to 63% depending on the rootstock sample”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1265–1406 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting increased dry substances by 4.4-8.8%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
graftede1
Outcome
amount of dry substancese1
Direction
increasede1
Value
4.4-8.8%e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cucumber plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1302–1317 · show in text ↑
e1

“The amount of dry substances in all grafted plants has increased by 4.4-8.8%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1408–1484 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Grafting increased vitamin C by 1.8-9.2%.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Treatment
graftede2
Outcome
amount of vitamin Ce1
Direction
increasede2
Value
1.8-9.2%e1

Not reportedComparator

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cucumber plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1302–1317 · show in text ↑
e1

“amount of vitamin C by 1.8-9.2%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1493–1524 · show in text ↑
e2

“all grafted plants has increased”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1440–1472 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors recommend VIO33638 and VIO33664 for further breeding investigation and grafted-plant production.

Taxon
cucumberCucumis sativuse0
Material
VIO33638 and VIO33664e1
Outcome
recommended for applying in the further investigation and breeding activities and in production of grafted plantse1

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

Cucumis sativus
Cucumis sativus · TaxonH. Zell · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“cucumber plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1302–1317 · show in text ↑
e1

“perspective rootstocks (VIO33638 and VIO33664) are identified by a set of economically valuable characteristics which are recommended for applying in the further investigation and breeding activities and in production of grafted plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1569–1804 · show in text ↑

grafting · yield · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Results differ

72 papers: 64 positive, 8 negative or no effect

63 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

68 papers more in this group

See all 72 papers →

grafting · quality: phytochemicals · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results

5 papers: 4 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 papers →

grafting · phenology · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results

11 papers: 10 positive, 1 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

grafting · quality: postharvest · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results

13 papers: 8 positive, 5 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 papers →

grafting · growth · Cucumis sativus (cucumber)Positive and negative results

59 papers: 55 positive, 4 negative or no effect

54 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

55 papers more in this group

See all 59 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.