Abstract
Deficit irrigation is a valid alternative to conventional irrigation to save water while maintaining high productivity in tomatoes. However, crop sensitivity to water stress due to deficit irrigation may change with the growth stage. To assess the physiological and agronomic responses of processing tomatoes to deficit irrigation applied at critical stages, a field experiment was conducted in a coastal site of Southern Italy, where seven irrigation treatments differing for daily evapotranspiration (ETc) restored (100%—full or 50%—deficit) and the time of watering (long-season or limited to the vegetative period or to flowering) were applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1. Plants continuously irrigated and those irrigated only at flowering maintained higher rates of leaf transpiration (E) and stomatal conductance (gs) over those irrigated only during the vegetative period. Fruit yield was the greatest under long-season full irrigation (51 t ha−1). Severe soil water deficit during flowering, more than during the vegetative period, adversely affected crop productivity. Irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) was maximized under long-season deficit irrigation (>19 kg m−3) or deficit irrigation during flowering (>16 kg m−3). E and gs measured at early or mid-flowering may be adopted as valuable indicators to predict crop productivity; however, they may be altered under high vapor pressure deficit (VPD). Predawn water potential, being little affected by VPD, is a more reliable parameter than leaf transpiration and stomatal conductance under these climatic conditions.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Continuous and flowering-only irrigation maintained higher leaf transpiration and stomatal conductance than vegetative-only irrigation in processing tomato.
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e2“Plants continuously irrigated and those irrigated only at flowering maintained higher rates of leaf transpiration (E) and stomatal conductance (gs) over those irrigated only during the vegetative period”
Claim · model-written summary
Long-season full irrigation gave the greatest fruit yield (51 t ha−1) in processing tomato.
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e3“Fruit yield was the greatest under long-season full irrigation (51 t ha−1)”
Claim · model-written summary
Severe soil water deficit during flowering adversely affected processing tomato productivity more than deficit during the vegetative period.
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e4“Severe soil water deficit during flowering, more than during the vegetative period, adversely affected crop productivity”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation water use efficiency was maximized under long-season deficit irrigation (>19 kg m−3).
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e5“Irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) was maximized under long-season deficit irrigation (>19 kg m−3) or deficit irrigation during flowering (>16 kg m−3)”
Claim · model-written summary
Irrigation water use efficiency was maximized under deficit irrigation during flowering (>16 kg m−3).
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e5“Irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) was maximized under long-season deficit irrigation (>19 kg m−3) or deficit irrigation during flowering (>16 kg m−3)”
Claim · model-written summary
E and gs measured at early or mid-flowering may serve as indicators of processing tomato productivity.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoese1
- Treatment
- E and gs measured at early or mid-floweringe6
- Outcome
- crop productivitye6
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e6“E and gs measured at early or mid-flowering may be adopted as valuable indicators to predict crop productivity; however, they may be altered under high vapor pressure deficit (VPD)”
Claim · model-written summary
E and gs may be altered under high vapor pressure deficit in processing tomato.
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e6“E and gs measured at early or mid-flowering may be adopted as valuable indicators to predict crop productivity; however, they may be altered under high vapor pressure deficit (VPD)”
Claim · model-written summary
Predawn water potential is little affected by VPD and is more reliable than leaf transpiration and stomatal conductance.
Verbatim
e1“applied to processing tomatoes cv. Hypeel F1”
e7“Predawn water potential, being little affected by VPD, is a more reliable parameter than leaf transpiration and stomatal conductance under these climatic conditions”
The same questions in other papers
stage · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 papers →drought · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
61 papers in the same direction as this paper · 19 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
77 papers more in this group
See all 81 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.