Abstract
This study was carried out to investigate the impacts of cyanobacteria ( Roholtiella sp.) high-value product extract (HVPE) and water resuspended biomass WRB treatments on bell pepper production using the hydroponic system under greenhouse conditions. Six cyanobacteria treatments (6 ml L −1 , 4 ml L −1 , and 2 ml L −1 – HVPE, 6 ml L −1 , 4 ml L −1 , and 2 ml L −1 – WRB, and TR0 as control) were evaluated using the foliar application method. The results showed that foliar application of HVPE with treatments of 2 ml L −1 , 4 ml L −1 , and 6 ml L −1 produced significantly higher values of physical growth parameters of bell pepper (BP) plants (shoot length, the number of leaves, plant leaf length, plant leaf width, and the diameter of the shoot), SPAD index, yield components (the fruit length, fruit width, the number of fruit per plant, and fresh weight per fruit), biochemical composition [ascorbic acid, phenolic acid, and total soluble solids (TSS)], and the total yield compared to the control group TR0. Also, significant higher values of growth parameters (shoot length, the number of leaves, plant leaf length, plant leaf width, the diameter of the shoot), SPAD index, yield components (the fruit length, fruit width, the number of fruits per plant, and fresh weight per fruit), biochemical composition [ascorbic acid, phenolic acid, and total soluble solids (TSS)], and the total yield were obtained with foliar spraying WRB at 2 ml L −1 , 4 ml L −1 , and 6 ml L −1 compared to the control group TR0. Consequently, the treated bell pepper with Roholtiella sp. HVPE and WRB were more efficient in enhancing production and chemical constituents compared with the control group.
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 3
Claim · model-written summary
HVPE foliar treatments at 2, 4, and 6 ml L−1 significantly increased bell pepper shoot and leaf growth traits relative to TR0.
Verbatim
e0“foliar application of HVPE with treatments of 2 ml L −1 , 4 ml L −1 , and 6 ml L −1 produced significantly higher values of physical growth parameters of bell pepper (BP) plants (shoot length, the number of leaves, plant leaf length, plant leaf width, and the diameter of the shoot), SPAD index, yield components (the fruit length, fruit width, the number of fruit per plant, and fresh weight per fruit), biochemical composition [ascorbic acid, phenolic acid, and total soluble solids (TSS)], and the total yield compared to the control group TR0”
t0“Bell Pepper (Capsicum annuum L.) Yield and Quality in a Hydroponic Greenhouse System”
Claim · model-written summary
HVPE foliar treatments significantly increased SPAD index, yield components, composition, and total yield versus TR0.
Verbatim
e0“foliar application of HVPE with treatments of 2 ml L −1 , 4 ml L −1 , and 6 ml L −1 produced significantly higher values of physical growth parameters of bell pepper (BP) plants (shoot length, the number of leaves, plant leaf length, plant leaf width, and the diameter of the shoot), SPAD index, yield components (the fruit length, fruit width, the number of fruit per plant, and fresh weight per fruit), biochemical composition [ascorbic acid, phenolic acid, and total soluble solids (TSS)], and the total yield compared to the control group TR0”
Claim · model-written summary
WRB foliar treatments significantly increased bell pepper growth, SPAD, yield components, composition, and total yield compared with TR0.
Verbatim
e0“significant higher values of growth parameters (shoot length, the number of leaves, plant leaf length, plant leaf width, the diameter of the shoot), SPAD index, yield components (the fruit length, fruit width, the number of fruits per plant, and fresh weight per fruit), biochemical composition [ascorbic acid, phenolic acid, and total soluble solids (TSS)], and the total yield were obtained with foliar spraying WRB at 2 ml L −1 , 4 ml L −1 , and 6 ml L −1 compared to the control group TR0”
t0“Bell Pepper”
The same questions in other papers
botanical · growth · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →application · growth · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results
44 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
45 papers more in this group
See all 49 papers →botanical · physiology: pigments · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Results agree
7 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 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.