Abstract
To seek the optimal combination of water–air for drip irrigation processing tomatoes in Northern Xinjiang, China, field experiments consisted of four irrigation levels, and two types of gas-filling methods were proposed. Throughout the whole growth period, the water consumption by physical aeration and chemical aeration increased by 13.65% and 9.27%, respectively compared with the nonaerated treatment. Under the conditions of physical aeration, the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%; while by chemical aeration, they increased by 7.91% and 4.61%, respectively. Physical aeration had the most prominent role in increasing the contents of organic acid, soluble solids, soluble sugar, lycopene, and VC in processing tomatoes. The presented indicators show that the effect of physical aeration was better than that of chemical aeration. Physical aeration in combination with different irrigation levels, the 4,950 m3·hm−2 irrigation level gave the highest yield of processing tomato, whereas the highest IWUE was obtained in the 4,500 m3·hm−2 irrigation treatment, and the quality parameters of processing tomatoes at the 4,500 m3·hm−2 irrigation level performed better than those at the 4,950 m3·hm−2 irrigation level. To take into account the requirements of processing tomatoes for maximum IWUE and fruit yield and quality, the entropy weight method was used to determine that the irrigation water volume of 4,500 m3·hm−2 under the conditions of physical aeration can be used as a suitable water and air combination pattern for processing tomatoes in drip irrigation in Northern Xinjiang.
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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Physical aeration increased water consumption by 13.65% relative to nonaerated treatment.
Verbatim
e0“the water consumption by physical aeration and chemical aeration increased by 13.65% and 9.27%, respectively compared with the nonaerated treatment”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical aeration increased water consumption by 9.27% relative to nonaerated treatment.
Verbatim
e0“the water consumption by physical aeration and chemical aeration increased by 13.65% and 9.27%, respectively compared with the nonaerated treatment”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Physical aeration increased processing tomato fruit yield by 8.14%.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoe0
- Treatment
- physical aeratione0
- Outcome
- fruit yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 8.14%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Under the conditions of physical aeration, the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Physical aeration increased irrigation water use efficiency by 4.74%.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoe0
- Treatment
- physical aeratione0
- Outcome
- irrigation water use efficiencye0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.74%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Under the conditions of physical aeration, the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical aeration increased fruit yield by 7.91%.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoest0
- Treatment
- chemical aeratione0
- Outcome
- fruit yielde1
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 7.91%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“while by chemical aeration, they increased by 7.91% and 4.61%, respectively”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Chemical aeration increased irrigation water use efficiency by 4.61%.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoest0
- Treatment
- chemical aeratione0
- Outcome
- irrigation water use efficiencye1
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 4.61%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“while by chemical aeration, they increased by 7.91% and 4.61%, respectively”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Physical aeration most prominently increased organic acid, soluble solids and soluble sugar contents.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoese0
- Treatment
- Physical aeratione0
- Outcome
- contents of organic acid, soluble solids, soluble sugare0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Physical aeration had the most prominent role in increasing the contents of organic acid, soluble solids, soluble sugar, lycopene, and VC in processing tomatoes”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Physical aeration most prominently increased lycopene and VC contents.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoese0
- Treatment
- Physical aeratione0
- Outcome
- lycopene, and VCe0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Physical aeration had the most prominent role in increasing the contents of organic acid, soluble solids, soluble sugar, lycopene, and VC in processing tomatoes”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Physical aeration performed better than chemical aeration on the presented indicators.
Verbatim
e0“the effect of physical aeration was better than that of chemical aeration”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Under physical aeration, 4,950 m3·hm−2 irrigation gave the highest fruit yield.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“the 4,950 m3·hm−2 irrigation level gave the highest yield of processing tomato”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Under physical aeration, 4,500 m3·hm−2 irrigation gave the highest IWUE.
- Taxon
- processing tomatoest0
- Treatment
- 4,500 m3·hm−2 irrigation treatmente0
- Outcome
- IWUEe0
- Direction
- higheste0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“the highest IWUE was obtained in the 4,500 m3·hm−2 irrigation treatment”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
Under physical aeration, tomato quality parameters were better at 4,500 than 4,950 m3·hm−2.
Verbatim
e0“the quality parameters of processing tomatoes at the 4,500 m3·hm−2 irrigation level performed better than those at the 4,950 m3·hm−2 irrigation level”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend 4,500 m3·hm−2 irrigation with physical aeration for drip irrigated processing tomato.
Verbatim
e0“the irrigation water volume of 4,500 m3·hm−2 under the conditions of physical aeration can be used as a suitable water and air combination pattern for processing tomatoes in drip irrigation in Northern Xinjiang”
t0“Processing Tomatoes”
e1“the processing tomato fruit yield and irrigation water use efficiency (IWUE) increased by 8.14% and 4.74%”
The same questions in other papers
irrigation · quality: general · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
116 papers in the same direction as this paper · 27 in the opposite direction · 3 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
143 papers more in this group
See all 147 papers →irrigation · yield · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results
238 papers in the same direction as this paper · 98 in the opposite direction · 7 reporting no difference from an alternative
- positive
- positive
- positive
340 papers more in this group
See all 344 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.