Abstract
Recently, so-called “vegetative” and “generative” rootstocks have been identified by seed companies as rootstock types that have different impacts on tomato scions. In this experiment of grafted grape tomato production in an organically managed high tunnel system, we characterized the effects of vegetative and generative rootstock cultivars on tomato yield components and fruit mineral contents. Grape tomato scions ‘BHN 1022’ (determinate) and ‘Sweet Hearts’ (indeterminate) were grafted onto ‘DR0141TX’ (vegetative), ‘Estamino’ (generative), and ‘Multifort’ (noncharacterized) rootstocks with self- and nongrafted scions as controls. Experiments were conducted twice with different transplanting dates (Expt. 1: 31 Jan. vs. Expt. 2: 9 Mar.) in 2018. No rootstock by scion interaction effects on whole-season fruit yield components were observed, indicating similar responses of determinate and indeterminate grape tomato scions to all rootstocks tested. For Expt. 1, the three rootstocks increased marketable fruit number, marketable yield, and total yield by 23.3%, 37.9%, and 34.4% on average, respectively, compared with the self- and nongrafted controls, primarily due to improved productivity during the peak and late harvest periods. For Expt. 2, the rootstocks did not significantly benefit any whole-season yield components. ‘DR0141TX’ and ‘Multifort’ increased stem diameter in both experiments, whereas ‘Estamino’ only increased stem diameter in Expt. 2 relative to the nongrafted controls. Consistent increase in aboveground dry biomass of rootstock treatments at crop termination in Expt. 1 corresponded to the greater yield of rootstock-grafted plants in that experiment. All rootstocks in both experiments consistently increased fruit P, K, Ca, Zn, and Fe contents on a dry weight basis at peak harvest regardless of the tomato scion used. Despite a relatively low level of root-knot nematode infestation, plants grafted with ‘DR0141TX’ or ‘Estamino’ tended to have lower root galling index ratings than scion controls and ‘Multifort’-grafted plants, which was more evident in Expt. 1. Given the different environmental conditions during the tomato production period between the two experiments conducted in high tunnels, our findings highlight the important influence of production environment on grafted tomato performance. This study on grafted grape tomatoes in high tunnel organic production systems also demonstrated that so-called “vegetative” and “generative” rootstocks had similar impacts on tomato scion yield components and fruit mineral contents.
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 15
Claim · model-written summary
No rootstock by scion interaction effects on whole-season fruit yield components were observed in grape tomato.
- Taxon
- Grape Tomatot0
- Treatment
- rootstock by scion interactione0
- Outcome
- whole-season fruit yield componentse0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“No rootstock by scion interaction effects on whole-season fruit yield components were observed”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
In Expt. 1, the three rootstocks increased grape tomato marketable fruit number by 23.3% on average compared with self- and nongrafted controls.
Verbatim
e0“For Expt. 1, the three rootstocks increased marketable fruit number, marketable yield, and total yield by 23.3%, 37.9%, and 34.4% on average, respectively, compared with the self- and nongrafted controls”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
In Expt. 1, the three rootstocks increased grape tomato marketable yield by 37.9% on average compared with self- and nongrafted controls.
Verbatim
e0“For Expt. 1, the three rootstocks increased marketable fruit number, marketable yield, and total yield by 23.3%, 37.9%, and 34.4% on average, respectively, compared with the self- and nongrafted controls”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
In Expt. 1, the three rootstocks increased grape tomato total yield by 34.4% on average compared with self- and nongrafted controls.
Verbatim
e0“For Expt. 1, the three rootstocks increased marketable fruit number, marketable yield, and total yield by 23.3%, 37.9%, and 34.4% on average, respectively, compared with the self- and nongrafted controls”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
In Expt. 2, the rootstocks did not significantly benefit any whole-season yield components of grape tomato.
- Taxon
- Grape Tomatot0
- Treatment
- the rootstockse0
- Outcome
- whole-season yield componentse0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
- Setting
- Expt. 2e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“For Expt. 2, the rootstocks did not significantly benefit any whole-season yield components”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock 'DR0141TX' increased grape tomato stem diameter in both experiments relative to nongrafted controls.
Verbatim
e0“‘DR0141TX’ and ‘Multifort’ increased stem diameter in both experiments, whereas ‘Estamino’ only increased stem diameter in Expt. 2 relative to the nongrafted controls”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock 'Multifort' increased grape tomato stem diameter in both experiments relative to nongrafted controls.
Verbatim
e0“‘DR0141TX’ and ‘Multifort’ increased stem diameter in both experiments, whereas ‘Estamino’ only increased stem diameter in Expt. 2 relative to the nongrafted controls”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock 'Estamino' increased grape tomato stem diameter only in Expt. 2 relative to nongrafted controls.
Verbatim
e0“‘DR0141TX’ and ‘Multifort’ increased stem diameter in both experiments, whereas ‘Estamino’ only increased stem diameter in Expt. 2 relative to the nongrafted controls”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
In Expt. 1, rootstock treatments consistently increased aboveground dry biomass of grape tomato at crop termination.
- Taxon
- Grape Tomatot0
- Treatment
- rootstock treatmentse0
- Outcome
- aboveground dry biomasse0
- Direction
- increasee0
- Qualifier
- at crop terminatione0
- Setting
- Expt. 1e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Consistent increase in aboveground dry biomass of rootstock treatments at crop termination in Expt. 1”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
In Expt. 1, the increase in aboveground dry biomass corresponded to the greater yield of rootstock-grafted grape tomato plants.
Verbatim
e0“Consistent increase in aboveground dry biomass of rootstock treatments at crop termination in Expt. 1 corresponded to the greater yield of rootstock-grafted plants in that experiment”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
All rootstocks in both experiments consistently increased grape tomato fruit P, K and Ca contents on a dry weight basis at peak harvest regardless of scion.
- Taxon
- Grape Tomatot0
- Treatment
- All rootstockse0
- Outcome
- fruit P, K, Cae0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- at peak harvest regardless of the tomato scion usede0
- Setting
- both experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“All rootstocks in both experiments consistently increased fruit P, K, Ca, Zn, and Fe contents on a dry weight basis at peak harvest regardless of the tomato scion used”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
All rootstocks in both experiments consistently increased grape tomato fruit Zn and Fe contents on a dry weight basis at peak harvest regardless of scion.
- Taxon
- Grape Tomatot0
- Treatment
- All rootstockse0
- Outcome
- Zn, and Fe contentse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- at peak harvest regardless of the tomato scion usede0
- Setting
- both experimentse0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“All rootstocks in both experiments consistently increased fruit P, K, Ca, Zn, and Fe contents on a dry weight basis at peak harvest regardless of the tomato scion used”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
Grape tomato plants grafted with DR0141TX or Estamino tended to have lower root galling index ratings than scion controls and Multifort-grafted plants, more evident in Expt. 1, despite low root-knot nematode infestation.
- Taxon
- Grape Tomatot0
- Treatment
- plants grafted with ‘DR0141TX’ or ‘Estamino’e0
- Interactor
- root-knot nematode
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=60)
Meloidogynee0pest - Outcome
- root galling index ratingse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Qualifier
- tended toe0
- Comparator
- scion controls and ‘Multifort’-grafted plantse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_penetrates_a_tomato_root_-_USDA-ARS.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Despite a relatively low level of root-knot nematode infestation, plants grafted with ‘DR0141TX’ or ‘Estamino’ tended to have lower root galling index ratings than scion controls and ‘Multifort’-grafted plants, which was more evident in Expt. 1”
t0“Grape Tomato”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors state that their findings highlight the important influence of production environment on grafted tomato performance.
- Taxon
- tomato
Solanum lycopersicume0 - Outcome
- grafted tomato performancee0
- Setting
- production environmente0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“our findings highlight the important influence of production environment on grafted tomato performance”
Claim · model-written summary
So-called vegetative and generative rootstocks had similar impacts on grape tomato scion yield components and fruit mineral contents.
- Taxon
- tomatoSolanum lycopersicume0
- Treatment
- “vegetative” and “generative” rootstockse0
- Outcome
- tomato scion yield components and fruit mineral contentse0
- Direction
- similare0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“so-called “vegetative” and “generative” rootstocks had similar impacts on tomato scion yield components and fruit mineral contents”
The same questions in other papers
grafting · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 151 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
172 papers more in this group
See all 176 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.