English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A study was conducted to determine if air blowers would be less time consuming, more economical, and as effective as hand-held electric vibrators to pollinate two greenhouse tomato ( Lycopersicon esculentum ) cultivars. Vibrator-pollinated plants of each cultivar produced greater marketable yield than did blower-pollinated plants. Within cultivars, marketable yield was greater and yields of culls were lower with vibrator-pollinated plants. Fruit weight and diameter and the number of seeds per fruit were greater in vibrator-pollinated plants. Marketable yield of `Trust' was greater and cull yield was lower than that of `Caruso' in 1996. However, marketable yield of `Caruso' was greater than that of `Trust' and cull yield was about the same in 1997. Interactions between pollinating tools and cultivar were not significant except for fruit weight in 1997. The time needed to pollinate 640 plants for 13 weeks was 7.13 and 11.75 person-hours using the air blower and the electric vibrator, respectively. Labor cost for pollination was $49.92 for the air blower and $82.25 for the vibrator. Yield loss using the air blower for pollination was not offset by the savings in operating costs.

Air Blowers Are Less Effective Pollinators of Greenhouse Tomatoes than Electric Vibrators but Cost Less to Operate