Abstract
Abstract Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses. Flower yields for the 3 methods were similar during the first 9 months of the study. In the second year, comparatively low yields were obtained with tablets, and the highest yields with the plastic mulch. The packets gave intermediate results, with 5 packets providing acceptable yields. Twenty-one months after placement, the tablets contained 56, 56, and less than 0.1% of their original N, P, and K, respectively. Nitrogen release at this time appeared comparatively slow. Considerable variation in nutrient content existed among packets 21 months after placement, with an average of 17, 33, and 38% of the original N, P, and K, respectively, being found. The packets still appeared to be releasing fertilizer at that time.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Flower yields for fertilizer packets, tablets and plastic mulch were similar during the first 9 months.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e1“Flower yields for the 3 methods were similar during the first 9 months of the study”
Claim · model-written summary
In the second year, fertilizer tablets gave comparatively low rose flower yields compared with plastic mulch.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e2“In the second year, comparatively low yields were obtained with tablets, and the highest yields with the plastic mulch”
Claim · model-written summary
In the second year, plastic mulch gave the highest rose flower yields, above fertilizer tablets.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e2“In the second year, comparatively low yields were obtained with tablets, and the highest yields with the plastic mulch”
Claim · model-written summary
Five fertilizer packets provided acceptable rose yields.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e6“The packets gave intermediate results, with 5 packets providing acceptable yields”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer packets gave intermediate rose results.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e6“The packets gave intermediate results, with 5 packets providing acceptable yields”
Claim · model-written summary
Twenty-one months after placement, fertilizer tablets retained 56, 56 and less than 0.1% of their original N, P and K.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e3“Twenty-one months after placement, the tablets contained 56, 56, and less than 0.1% of their original N, P, and K, respectively”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer packets retained on average 17, 33 and 38% of the original N, P and K 21 months after placement.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e5“Considerable variation in nutrient content existed among packets 21 months after placement, with an average of 17, 33, and 38% of the original N, P, and K, respectively, being found”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen release from the fertilizer appeared comparatively slow 21 months after placement.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e4“Nitrogen release at this time appeared comparatively slow”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer packets showed considerable variation in nutrient content 21 months after placement.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e5“Considerable variation in nutrient content existed among packets 21 months after placement”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer packets still appeared to be releasing fertilizer at 21 months after placement.
Verbatim
e0“Fertilization of field grown roses, R. hybrida cv. Christian Dior, in south Florida with fertilizer packets and tablets was compared with a proven plastic mulch method of reducing fertilizer losses”
e7“The packets still appeared to be releasing fertilizer at that time”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · yield · RosaPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
fertilization · yield · RosaPositive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 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.