Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the landscape performance of annual bedding plants grown in a ground pine tree substrate (PTS) produced from loblolly pine trees ( Pinus taeda ) or in ground pine bark (PB) when transplanted into the landscape and grown at three different fertilizer rates. Begonia ( Begonia × semperflorens-cultorum ) ‘Cocktail Vodka’, coleus ( Solenostemen scutellarioides ) ‘Kingswood Torch’, impatiens ( Impatiens walleriana ) ‘Dazzler White’, marigold ( Tagetes erecta ) ‘Bonanza Yellow’, petunia ( Petunia × hybrid ) ‘Wave Purple’, salvia ( Salvia splendens ) ‘Red Hot Sally’, and vinca ( Catharanthus roseus ) ‘Cooler Pink’ were evaluated in 2005, and begonia ‘Cocktail Whiskey’, marigold ‘Inca Gold’, salvia ‘Red Hot Sally’, and vinca ‘Cooler Pink’ were evaluated in 2006 and 2007. Landscape fertilizer rates were 1 lb/1000 ft 2 nitrogen (N) in 2005 and 0, 1, and 2 lb/1000 ft 2 N in 2006 and 2007. Visual observations throughout each year indicated that all species, whether grown in PTS or PB, had comparable foliage quality in the landscape trial beds during the growing period. With few exceptions, dry weight and plant size for all species increased with increasing fertilizer additions, regardless of the substrate in which the plants were grown. For the unfertilized treatment, when comparing plant dry weight between PB and PTS for each species and for each year (eight comparisons), PTS-grown plant dry weight was less than PB-grown plants in three out of the eight comparisons. However, there were fewer differences in plant dry weight between PTS- and PB-grown plants when fertilizer was applied (PTS-grown plants were smaller than PB-grown plants in only 2 of the 16 comparisons: four species, two fertilizer rates, and 2 years), indicating that N immobilization may be somewhat of an issue, but not to the extent expected. Therefore, the utilization of PTS as a substrate for the production of landscape annuals may be acceptable in the context of landscape performance.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 6
Claim · model-written summary
Foliage quality was comparable between pine tree substrate and pine bark for all evaluated species.
Verbatim
e0“all species, whether grown in PTS or PB, had comparable foliage quality in the landscape trial beds during the growing period.”
Claim · model-written summary
Dry weight and plant size generally increased with fertilizer additions regardless of substrate.
- Taxon
- all speciese0
- Treatment
- increasing fertilizer additionse0
- Outcome
- dry weight and plant sizee0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- With few exceptionse0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“With few exceptions, dry weight and plant size for all species increased with increasing fertilizer additions, regardless of the substrate in which the plants were grown.”
Claim · model-written summary
Without fertilizer, PTS plants had less dry weight than PB plants in three of eight comparisons.
Verbatim
e0“For the unfertilized treatment, when comparing plant dry weight between PB and PTS for each species and for each year (eight comparisons), PTS-grown plant dry weight was less than PB-grown plants in three out of the eight comparisons.”
Claim · model-written summary
With fertilizer, PTS plants were smaller in only two of 16 comparisons.
Verbatim
e0“there were fewer differences in plant dry weight between PTS- and PB-grown plants when fertilizer was applied (PTS-grown plants were smaller than PB-grown plants in only 2 of the 16 comparisons: four species, two fertilizer rates, and 2 years)”
Claim · model-written summary
Nitrogen immobilization may be an issue, though less than expected.
Verbatim
t0“Annual Bedding Plants”
e0“indicating that N immobilization may be somewhat of an issue, but not to the extent expected.”
Claim · model-written summary
Pine tree substrate may be acceptable for landscape annual production.
Verbatim
t0“Annual Bedding Plants”
e0“the utilization of PTS as a substrate for the production of landscape annuals may be acceptable in the context of landscape performance.”
The same questions in other papers
growing medium · growth · Viridiplantae (plants)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 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.