<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>0718-5839</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Chilean journal of agricultural research]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Chilean J. Agric. Res.]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>0718-5839</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Instituto de Investigaciones Agropecuarias, INIA]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S0718-58392011000400001</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4067/S0718-58392011000400001</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Growth and Yield Response of Watermelon to in-row Plant Spacings and Mycorrhiza]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[Respuesta del Crecimiento Vegetativo y Producción de Sandía a Diferentes Distancias entre Plantas y a Micorrizas]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ban]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Dean]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Goreta Ban]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Smiljana]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Oplanic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Milan]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Horvat]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Josipa]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A01"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Novak]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Bruno]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A03"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zanic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Katja]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A02"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Znidarcic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Dragan]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="A04"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="A01">
<institution><![CDATA[,Institute of Agriculture and Tourism  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Porec ]]></addr-line>
<country>Croatia</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A02">
<institution><![CDATA[,Institute for Adriatic Crops  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Split ]]></addr-line>
<country>Croatia</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A03">
<institution><![CDATA[,University of Zagreb Faculty of Agriculture ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Zagreb ]]></addr-line>
<country>Croatia</country>
</aff>
<aff id="A04">
<institution><![CDATA[,University of Ljubljana Biotechnical Faculty ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Ljubljana ]]></addr-line>
<country>Slovenia</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>12</month>
<year>2011</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>12</month>
<year>2011</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>71</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<fpage>497</fpage>
<lpage>502</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0718-58392011000400001&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S0718-58392011000400001&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S0718-58392011000400001&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[Worldwide, a significant increase in watermelon (Citrullus lanatus [Thunb.] Matsum. & Nakai) growing areas has been registered in the last few years. In-row plant spacing has a significant effect on the growth and yield of watermelon, and can enhance competition for water and nutrients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of in-row plant spacing (1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 m) and arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM) fungi Glomus mosseae inoculations on watermelon growth and yield under field conditions during 2003, 2004, and 2005 year. In 2003, the main vine length, number of leaves, and number of lateral branches were increased quadratically as the in-row plant spacing increased from 1.0 to 2.5. With an increase in the in-row plant spacing the early yield of watermelon decreased in 2004, while the fruit number decreased in 2003 and 2004. The total yield and fruit number decreased with an increase in the in-row plant spacing in all 3 yr; however, the fruit mass increased at wider plant spacings in 2003. Mycorrhizal inoculation increased the main vine length and the number of lateral branches in 2003. Compared to non-mycorrhizal plants, mycorrhizal plants presented higher early yield in 2005 and a higher early fruit number in 2003 and 2005. Mycorrhizal inoculation increased total yield in 2005; however, the fruit weight was not affected by mycorrhizal inoculation during early or total harvest. In this study, an in-row plant spacing of 1.0 m provided the best early and total yield while maintaining high fruit weight. The growth and yield enhancement of watermelon due to mycorrhizal colonization was not consistent; therefore, mycorrhizal inoculation could not be recommended as a standard production practice.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="es"><p><![CDATA[En los últimos años se ha registrado un significativo aumento en las áreas cultivadas con sandía (Citrullus lanatus [Thunb.] Matsum. & Nakai) a nivel mundial. La distancia entre plantas en la hilera tiene un efecto significativo en su crecimiento y rendimiento, y puede generar competencia por agua y nutrientes. Se estudiaron los efectos de diferentes distancias en hilera (1,0; 1,5; 2,0 y 2,5 m) y de inoculaciones con micorrizas arbusculares (AM), Glomus mosseae, sobre el crecimiento y el rendimiento de la sandía. El ensayo se llevó a cabo en condiciones de campo durante 2003, 2004, y 2005. En el año 2003 se observó un aumento cuadrático sobre la longitud del tallo principal, número de hojas y ramas laterales debido al aumento de la distancia entre plantas de 1,0 a 2,5 m. En 2004, con un aumento de separación entre plantas se redujo el rendimiento temprano, y el número de frutos disminuyó en 2003 y 2004. Durante el ensayo, la producción total y el número de frutos disminuyeron con el aumento de la separación entre plantas, mientras en el año 2003 aumentó el peso de los frutos. La inoculación de micorrizas aumentó la longitud del tallo principal y el número de ramas laterales el 2003. Las plantas micorrizadas presentaron un mayor rendimiento temprano (2005) y número de frutos (2003 y 2005). La inoculación aumentó la producción total el 2005, mientras el peso del fruto no fue afectado durante la cosecha temprana o final. En este estudio, el marco de plantación de 1,0 m mostró la producción temprana y total más alta manteniendo un alto peso del fruto. El crecimiento y aumento del rendimiento de la sandía, debido a la micorrización no fueron consistentes, por lo tanto, la inoculación de micorrizas no puede ser recomendada como una práctica de producción estándar.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Arbuscular mycorrhiza]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="la"><![CDATA[Citrullus lanatus]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="la"><![CDATA[Glomus mosseae]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[fruit]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[plant density]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[vegetative growth]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="la"><![CDATA[Citrullus lanatus]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[crecimiento vegetativo]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[fruta]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="la"><![CDATA[Glomus mosseae]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[densidad de plantas]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[micorrizas arbusculares]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><body><![CDATA[  	    <p align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><b>Chilean Journal of Agricultural Research 71(4) October - December</b></font></p> 	    <p align="right"><font face="verdana" size="2"><b>RESEARCH</b></font></p> 	    <p align="justify"><font face="verdana" size="4"><b>Growth and Yield Response of Watermelon to in-row Plant Spacings and Mycorrhiza</b></font></p> 	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>Respuesta del Crecimiento Vegetativo y Producci&oacute;n de Sand&iacute;a a Diferentes Distancias entre Plantas y a Micorrizas</b></font></p>     <p align="justify"><font face="verdana" size="2"><b>Dean Ban<sup>1</sup>, Smiljana Goreta Ban<sup>2</sup>*, Milan Oplanic<sup>1</sup>, Josipa Horvat<sup>1</sup>, Bruno Novak<sup>3</sup>, Katja Zanic<sup>2</sup>, and Dragan Znidarcic<sup>4</sup></b></font>    <br> </p>     <p align="justify"><font face="verdana" size="2"><sup>1</sup>Institute of Agriculture and Tourism, Carla Huguesa 8, 52440 Porec, Croatia.</font>    <br>   <font face="verdana" size="2"><sup>2</sup>Institute for Adriatic Crops, Put Duilova 11, 21000 Split, Croatia. "Corresponding author (<a href="mailto:smilja@krs.hr">smilja@krs.hr</a>).</font>    <br>   <font face="verdana" size="2"><sup>3</sup>University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Svetosimunska 25, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia.</font>    ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<br> <font face="verdana" size="2"><sup>4</sup>University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty, Jamnikarjeva 101, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia.    <br> </font></p> <hr width="100%" size="1" noshade>     <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Worldwide, a significant increase in watermelon <i>(Citrullus lanatus</i> &#91;Thunb.&#93; Matsum. &amp; Nakai) growing areas has been registered in the last few years. In&#45;row plant spacing has a significant effect on the growth and yield of watermelon, and can enhance competition for water and nutrients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of in&#45;row plant spacing (1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 m) and arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM) fungi <i>Glomus mosseae</i> inoculations on watermelon growth and yield under field conditions during 2003, 2004, and 2005 year. In 2003, the main vine length, number of leaves, and number of lateral branches were increased quadratically as the in&#45;row plant spacing increased from 1.0 to 2.5. With an increase in the in&#45;row plant spacing the early yield of watermelon decreased in 2004, while the fruit number decreased in 2003 and 2004. The total yield and fruit number decreased with an increase in the in&#45;row plant spacing in all 3 yr; however, the fruit mass increased at wider plant spacings in 2003. Mycorrhizal inoculation increased the main vine length and the number of lateral branches in 2003. Compared to non&#45;mycorrhizal plants, mycorrhizal plants presented higher early yield in 2005 and a higher early fruit number in 2003 and 2005. Mycorrhizal inoculation increased total yield in 2005; however, the fruit weight was not affected by mycorrhizal inoculation during early or total harvest. In this study, an in&#45;row plant spacing of 1.0 m provided the best early and total yield while maintaining high fruit weight. The growth and yield enhancement of watermelon due to mycorrhizal colonization was not consistent; therefore, mycorrhizal inoculation could not be recommended as a standard production practice.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Key words:</b> Arbuscular mycorrhiza, <i>Citrullus lanatus, Glomus mosseae,</i> fruit, plant density, vegetative growth.</font>    <br> 	      <br> 	</p> 	<hr width="100%" size="1" noshade> 	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">En los &uacute;ltimos anos se ha registrado un significativo aumento en las &aacute;reas cultivadas con sand&iacute;a <i>(Citrullus lanatus</i> &#91;Thunb.&#93; Matsum. &amp; Nakai) a nivel mundial. La distancia entre plantas en la hilera tiene un efecto significativo en su crecimiento y rendimiento, y puede generar competencia por agua y nutrientes. Se estudiaron los efectos de diferentes distancias en hilera (1,0; 1,5; 2,0 y 2,5 m) y de inoculaciones con micorrizas arbusculares (AM), <i>Glomus mosseae,</i> sobre el crecimiento y el rendimiento de la sand&iacute;a. El ensayo se llev&oacute; a cabo en condiciones de campo durante 2003, 2004, y 2005. En el ano 2003 se observ&oacute; un aumento cuadr&aacute;tico sobre la longitud del tallo principal, n&uacute;mero de hojas y ramas laterales debido al aumento de la distancia entre plantas de 1,0 a 2,5 m. En 2004, con un aumento de separaci&oacute;n entre plantas se redujo el rendimiento temprano, y el n&uacute;mero de frutos disminuy&oacute; en 2003 y 2004. Durante el ensayo, la producci&oacute;n total y el n&uacute;mero de frutos disminuyeron con el aumento de la separaci&oacute;n entre plantas, mientras en el ano 2003 aument&oacute; el peso de los frutos. La inoculaci&oacute;n de micorrizas aument&oacute; la longitud del tallo principal y el n&uacute;mero de ramas laterales el 2003. Las plantas micorrizadas presentaron un mayor rendimiento temprano (2005) y n&uacute;mero de frutos (2003 y 2005). La inoculaci&oacute;n aument&oacute; la producci&oacute;n total el 2005, mientras el peso del fruto no fue afectado durante la cosecha temprana o final. En este estudio, el marco de plantaci&oacute;n de 1,0 m mostr&oacute; la producci&oacute;n temprana y total m&aacute;s alta manteniendo un alto peso del fruto. El crecimiento y aumento del rendimiento de la sand&iacute;a, debido a la micorrizaci&oacute;n no fueron consistentes, por lo tanto, la inoculaci&oacute;n de micorrizas no puede ser recomendada como una pr&aacute;ctica de producci&oacute;n est&aacute;ndar.</font></p> 	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Palabras clave:</b> <i>Citrullus lanatus,</i> crecimiento vegetativo, fruta, <i>Glomus mosseae,</i> densidad de plantas, micorrizas arbusculares.</font>    <br>     </p> 	<hr width="100%" size="1" noshade>     <p align="justify"><font size="3" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>INTRODUCTION</strong></font></p>     ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The production and consumption of watermelon <i>(Citrullus lanatus</i> &#91;Thunb.&#93; Matsum. &amp; Nakai) are greater than that of any other species in the Cucurbitaceae family (Robinson and Decker&#45;Walters, 1997). In Croatia, an increase in the consumption and production of watermelon has been observed in the last 15 yr (FAOSTAT, 2010). Although, the acreage of watermelon in Croatia increased, the average yields are still rather low on some farms (18 t ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>).    <br>         <br>     Cultural techniques for obtaining profitable watermelon yields include the usage of polyethylene (PE) mulches and drip irrigation (Ban <i>et al.,</i> 2009). Other measures such as the implementation of plant density strategies, nutrient management and arbuscular mycorrhiza (AM) inoculation have been reported to have a positive impact on watermelon yield (Duthie <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Kaya <i>et al.,</i> 2003; Goreta <i>et al.,</i> 2005).</font></p>     <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Higher yield per area in watermelon is related to dense in&#45;row plant spacings (NeSmith, 1993; Huitron&#45;Ramirez <i>et al.,</i> 2009). High plant density is recommended in watermelon seed production because more fruit per area is achieved at a denser spacing (Edelstein and Nerson, 2002). When the number of plants per area is increased, the fruit number per area is enhanced, but the yield and fruit number per plant is reduced (Brinen <i>et al.,</i> 1979; NeSmith, 1993; Duthie <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Sanders <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Motsenbocker and Arancibia, 2002). Thus, the relatively high yield at denser in&#45;row spacings is due to a high fruit number per area (NeSmith, 1993; Duthie <i>et al.,</i> 1999). However, the fruit weight could be negatively impacted by high plant densities (Brinen <i>et al.,</i> 1979; Sanders <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Motsenbocker and Arancibia, 2002; Goreta <i>et al.,</i> 2005). Research on diverse vegetable crops have shown that yield increases linearly when the in&#45;row plant spacing is reduced (Knavel, 1988; Znidarcic and Osvald, 1999; Ban <i>et al.,</i> 2006).</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Dense spacing designs may increase competition for water and fertilizers, which results in inadequate vegetative growth and low yields (Knavel, 1988). Arbuscular mycorrhiza inoculation improves water usage under irrigated and non&#45;irrigated systems and enhances soil mineral uptake, especially P (Sari <i>et al.,</i> 2002; Kaya <i>et al.,</i> 2003; Meding and Zasoski, 2008). In previous studies, AM fungi <i>Glomus mosseae</i> had a positive effect on different plant species (Chandanie <i>et al.,</i> 2006; Smith and Read, 2008). Similarly, watermelon plants inoculated with <i>G. clarum</i> achieved improved vegetative growth and higher yields (Kaya <i>et al.,</i> 2003).</font></p>      <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The goal of the present study was to determine the effects of in&#45;row plant spacing and AM fungi inoculation on watermelon growth and yield under Mediterranean growing conditions.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>MATERIALS AND METHODS</b></font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The experiments were conducted on a farm in Pula (44&deg;51' N, 13&deg;51' E, 10 m.a.s.l.), which is located in the Mediterranean area of Croatia, in 2003, 2004, and 2005. A two&#45;factorial experiment was designed as a split&#45;plot scheme, with three replicates. Watermelon cv. Fantasy F<sub>1</sub> (Known&#45;You Seed, Co., Kaohsung, Taiwan) was planted at in&#45;row spacings of 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 m (main plot) with or without inoculation with AM fungi <i>G. mosseae</i> (sub&#45;plot). The main plot contained three rows mulched with back polyethylene film, with a between&#45;row spacing equal to 2 m. The main plot area was 192 m<sup>2</sup> (6 m x 32 m), and the sub&#45;plot was a half of main plot 96 m<sup>2</sup> (6 m x 16 m). Main plots were separated from other treatments by edge row from right and left side.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">In all 3 yr, transplants were grown in a heated greenhouse. In 2003, transplants were grown in polystyrene trays with a cell volume of 100 mL (40 cells per tray). Alternatively, in 2004 and 2005, transplants were grown in polystyrene trays with a cell volume of 60 mL (84 cells per tray). Polystyrene trays were hand&#45;filled with the Klasmann peat&#45;based growing substrate (pH 6&#45;6.5; 180 mg N L<sup>&#45;1</sup>; 210 mg P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> L<sup>&#45;1</sup>; 250 mg K<sub>2</sub>O L<sup>&#45;1</sup>; 85 mg MgO L<sup>&#45;1</sup> + microelements; Klasmann&#45;Deilmann GmbH, Geeste, Germany), and one seed per cell was sown on 26 March 2003, 4 April 2004, and 6</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">April 2005. Seedlings were irrigated every day and were fertilized once a week with a commercial nutrient solution Folifertil&#45;T (Petrokemija d.o.o., Kutina, Croatia; 12% N, 4% P<sub>2</sub>O<sub>5</sub> and 6% K<sub>2</sub>O + microelements).</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The winter forage crops &#91;cabbage <i>(Brassica oleracea</i> L. var. <i>capitata),</i> spinach <i>(Spinacia oleracea</i> L.), and kale <i>(Brassica oleracea</i> L. var. <i>sabauda)&#93;</i> were harvested 1&#45;mo before watermelon planting, and the experimental fields were plowed to a depth of 30 cm. Prior to plowing, organic manure was incorporated at a rate of 40 t ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>. After the experimental fields were plowed, 1000 kg ha<sup>&#45;1</sup> of mineral fertilizer 5N&#45;8.7P&#45;24.9K was incorporated into the soil with a rotary cultivator. Subsequently, herbicide (napropamide; N,N&#45;diethyl&#45;2&#45;&#91;1&#45;naphthalenyloxy&#93;propa&#45;namide) was applied to the soil with a rotary cultivator at a rate of 4 L ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>.</font></p>  	    ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Drip tape was placed beneath the black PE film, and with emitter spacing at 20 cm (capacity of 4 L h<sup>&#45;1</sup>). Transplants with 3 to 4 true leaves were planted on 8 May 2003,&nbsp;23 May 2004, and 22 May 2005.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Inocula of AM fungi <i>G. mosseae</i> were obtained using corn <i>(Zea mays</i> L.) as a host plant. Corn seed was grown in pots (300 mL) filled with a substrate composed of sand:expanded clay:inoculum at a 50:45:5 ratio for 3&#45;mo. To obtain the inoculum, the stems were cut and discarded, and the roots were ground into 0.5 cm pieces. Approximately 5 g of the inoculum was added to each planting hole immediately before planting, according to he method of Kaya <i>et al.</i> (2003).</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Soil insecticide (chlorpyrifos; <i>O,O</i>&#45;diethyl <i>O</i>&#45;&#91;3,5,6&#45;trichloro&#45;2&#45;pyridyl&#93;phosphorothioate) was added to each hole at a rate of 3 kg ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>. After planting, a few granules of limacid Mesurol G (methiocarb) were spread near each plant at a rate of 4 kg ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Fertigation was conducted five times during the vegetative phase by applying water&#45;soluble fertilizer (Kristalon, Hydro Agri, Rotterdam, The Netherlands). In total, fertilizer was added at a rate of 71 kg N ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>, 97 kg P2O5 ha<sup>&#45;1</sup> and 96 kg K<sub>2</sub>O ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>. Fertigation was conducted 7 d after planting and was reapplied every 10 d. Each year, during vegetative growth phase, plants were treated twice every year against <i>Pseudoperonospora cubensis</i> and <i>Aphides</i> with metalaxyl (methyl N&#45;&#91;2,6&#45;dimethylphenyl&#93;&#45;N&#45;&#91;(methoxyacetyl)&#93;&#45;DL&#45;a&#45;laninate) and alpha&#45;cypermethrin (R&#45;cyano&#91;3&#45;phenoxy&#45;phenyl&#93;methyl&#91;1S,3S&#93;&#45;rel&#45;3&#45;&#91;2,2&#45;dichloroethenyl&#93;&#45;2,2&#45;dime thylcyclopropanecarboxylate), respectively. Every year, the rows between the beds were treated once with the nonselective contact herbicide (glufosinate&#45;ammonium; 2&#45;amino&#45;4&#45;&#91;hydroxymethylphosphinyl&#93;butanoic acid monoammonium salt). Before the vines reached a length of 40 cm, the herbicide was applied at a rate of 6 L ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>. Subsequently, weeds were manually removed when necessary.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">In 2003, 2004, and 2005, vegetative growth parameters (main vine length, number of leaves on the main vine, number of lateral branches, and main vine diameter) were measured 22 d after planting (DAP), 29 DAP, and 19 DAP, in 2003, 2004, and 2005, respectively. In total, 15 plants per treatment were evaluated.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Watermelons were harvested by hand when the fruit matured. The watermelons were picked by experienced persons and in general fruit were considered mature when the tendril nearest to fruit start to dry, and color of fruit on the bottom side changed from creamy white to yellowish. In all 3 yr, three harvests were conducted during maturation (from 8&#45;21 July 2003, 11&#45;22 August 2004,&nbsp;and 25 July&#45;6 August 2005). Fruits were measured and weighed during harvest and the early (first harvest) and total yield were determined. Damaged fruit and fruit smaller than 3 kg were considered non&#45;marketable fruit.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">To determine the significance of in&#45;row plant spacing, mycorrhiza inoculation and interaction effects, data were analyzed separately for each year by conducting an ANOVA using proc GLM from SAS software (SAS Institute, 1999). To identify trends in the in&#45;row plant spacing, linear and quadratic contrasts were employed.</font></p>      <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>RESULTS AND DISCUSSION</b></font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Vegetative growth</b></font>    <br>     <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">In&#45;row plant spacing and mycorrhizal inoculation weakly influenced watermelon vegetative growth, and interactions among variables were not observed (<a href="#t1">Table 1</a>). In&#45;row plant spacing had an effect on the main vine length, number of leaves, and number of lateral branches in 2003, and a quadratic response was observed as the in&#45;row plant spacing increased from 1.0 to 2.5 (<a href="#t1">Table 1</a>). Maynard and Scott (1998) distinguished types of melon growth based on the vine length, which probably could be the case with watermelon cultivars. In general, early watermelon cultivars have a shorter vegetative period and less vegetative growth than late cultivars. In the present study, an early watermelon cultivar was planted. Thus, maximum vegetative potential may be achieved with denser plant spacings than with late watermelon cultivars, especially in the early stages of growth when the measurements were performed. Except in 2003, when the main vine length and the number of lateral branches increased, mycorrhizal inoculation did not have a significant effect on watermelon vegetative growth (<a href="#t1">Table 1</a>). In a previous study, the effect of <i>G. mosseae</i> fungi on watermelon transplant growth was inconsistent, probably due to the absence of drought stress or stress caused by low mineral availability (Ban <i>et al.,</i> 2007). Mycorrhizal colonization provides superior results in stressed environments (Smith and Read, 2008).</font></p> 	    ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p align="center"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b><a name="t1"></a></b></font>    <br>     <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Table 1. Effects of in&#45;row plant spacing and mycorrhiza on watermelon main vine length, diameter and number of leaves, and number of lateral branches 2003, 2004, and 2005.</b></font></p>     <p align="center"><img src="/fbpe/img/chiljar/v71n4/at01tb01.jpg" width="600" height="184"></p> 	<table width="594" border="0" align="center">       <tr>         <th width="588" scope="row">    
<div align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><sup>1</sup>Significant effects are denoted as: ns, *, **, non significant or significant at P &le; 0.05, 0.01, respectively. In-row effects were linear (L) or quadratic (Q).</font></div></th>       </tr>     </table> 	    <p align="center">&nbsp;</p>     <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The difference in plant early vegetative growth between years was mostly due to different planting dates. In 2003, the planting was at the beginning of May (8 May), while in 2004 and 2005 planting was at 23 May and 22 May, respectively. The weather conditions (soil and air temperatures) are more favorable to watermelon growth in later planting dates, and therefore we have observed more vigorous plants in 2004 and 2005. Also, if we compare 2004 and 2005, the more vigorous plants were observed in 2004 because the observations were done 29 days after planting (DAP) as compared to 19 DAP in 2005.</font></p>     <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Yield and yield components</b></font>    <br>     <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The early yield of watermelon decreased with an increase in the in&#45;row plant spacing in 2004, and the fruit number decreased in 2003 and 2004 (<a href="#t2">Table 2</a>). Fruit mass in early harvest increased with an increase in the in&#45;row plant spacing in 2003; however, plant spacing did not have an effect in 2004 and 2005 (<a href="#t2">Table 2</a>). In&#45;row plant spacing had a stronger effect on the total yield than on the early yield (<a href="#t2">Table 2</a> and <a href="#t3">3</a>). In all 3 yr, the total yield and fruit number per hectare decreased with an increase in the in&#45;row plant spacing, and the fruit mass increased in 2003 (<a href="#t3">Table 3</a>).</font></p>     <p align="center">    <br> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b><a name="t2"></a></b></font>    ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<br> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Table 2. Effects of in&#45;row plant spacing and mycorrhiza on early (first) harvest marketable yield, fruit number, and fruit weight of watermelon in 2003, 2004, and 2005.</b></font></p>     <p align="center"><img src="/fbpe/img/chiljar/v71n4/at01tb02.jpg" width="600" height="173"></p> 	<table width="584" border="0" align="center">       <tr>         <th width="578" scope="row">    
<div align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><sup>1</sup>Significant effects are denoted as: ns, *, **, non significant or significant at P &le; 0.05, 0.01, respectively. In-row effects were linear (L) or quadratic (Q).</font></div></th>       </tr>     </table> 	    <p>&nbsp;</p>     <p align="center"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b><a name="t3"></a></b></font>    <br>   <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><b>Table 3. Effects of in&#45;row plant spacing and mycorrhiza on total yield, number of fruit, and fruit weight of watermelon in 2003, 2004, and 2005.</b></font>    <br> </p>     <p align="center"><img src="/fbpe/img/chiljar/v71n4/at01tb03.jpg" width="600" height="174"></p>     
<p align="justify"></p> 	<table width="605" border="0" align="center">       <tr>         <th width="599" scope="row">    <div align="justify"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif"><sup>1</sup>Significant effects are denoted as: ns, *, **, non significant or significant at P &le; 0.05, 0.01, respectively. In-row effects were linear (L) or quadratic (Q).</font></div></th>       </tr>     </table> 	    ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p align="justify">    <br> 	  <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Our results confirmed the findings of other studies, which suggest that fruit yield increases with an increase in plant density due to an increase in the plant number per area and the number of fruit per area (Brinen <i>et al.,</i> 1979; NeSmith, 1993; Duthie <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Sanders <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Motsenbocker and Arancibia, 2002; Goreta <i>et al.,</i> 2005). Frequently, the average fruit weight decreases with an increase in the plant density (Brinen <i>et al.,</i> 1979; Sanders <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Motsenbocker and Arancibia, 2002; Goreta <i>et al.,</i> 2005); however, in our study, this relationship was only observed in 2003. In studies with narrower in&#45;row plant spacings, the effect of plant spacing on the fruit weight was more pronounced than in the present study. Moreover, a stronger reduction in fruit weight was observed when the in&#45;row plant spacing was less than 1.0 m (NeSmith, 1993; Sanders <i>et al.,</i> 1999; Motsenbocker and Arancibia, 2002).</font>    <br> 	  <font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif">    <br>       The early yield of mycorrhizal plants (16.0 t ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>) was greater than that of non&#45;mycorrhizal plants (13.8 t ha<sup>&#45;1</sup>) in 2005. In addition, in 2003 and 2005, the early fruit number of mycorrhizal plants was greater than that of non&#45;mycorrhizal plants (<a href="#t2">Table 2</a>). Mycorrhizal inoculation increased the total yield in 2005, and an interaction between in&#45;row plant spacing and mycorrhizal inoculation was observed in 2004 and 2005. Alternatively, the fruit weight was not affected by mycorrhizal inoculation during early or total harvest (<a href="#t2">Tables 2</a> and <a href="#t3">3</a>). At the time of flowering and fruit set, weather conditions (low air and soil temperatures) could be the factor that limits watermelon yield. Our results suggest that mycorrhiza inoculation contributed to overcoming these conditions and inoculated plants were able to achieve better early fruit set. Later in the season, when weather conditions and cultivation measures are not limiting the effect of mycorrhiza is less pronounced which was confirmed with lack of response of total fruit number and fruit mass on inoculation.</font></font></p>     <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">The watermelon yield decreased substantially from 2003 to 2005 because the same field was cultivated. Therefore, mycorrhizal inoculation had a positive effect on the early and total yield in the third year (2005) because the plants were exposed to stress caused by watermelon growth under monoculture. Similar results were observed in a study performed by Sari <i>et al.</i> (2002), which demonstrated that <i>G. mosseae</i> increased the garlic yield in the second year.</font></p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Although <i>Glomus</i> spp. are the most common, AM fungi species can colonize about 80% of all terrestrial plant roots (Akiyama and Hayashi, 2002), some degree of plant selectivity in the receptiveness of other <i>Glomus</i> spp. and other AM fungi is often observed (Smith and Read, 2008). <i>Glomus mosseae</i> is often used in cucumber production in the presence of soil born diseases as well as under drought stress or low P availability (Chandanie <i>et al.,</i> 2006; Zhang <i>et al.,</i> 2008). However, significant positive effects on the watermelon biomass and yield have been observed following inoculation with <i>G. clarum</i> in the presence and absence of drought stress conditions (Kaya <i>et al.,</i> 2003). Thus, appropriate plant species&#45;AM fungi combinations must be determined to enhance the benefits of symbiosis (Sensory <i>et al.,</i> 2007). In a study on commercial inocula of mixed mycorrhizal fungi species, early growth, and transplant establishment were enhanced under stressful conditions; however, the effect of inoculation on yield was inconsistent. As a result, mycorrhizal inoculation could not be introduced as a standard growing technology (Westphal <i>et al.,</i> 2008). To the best of our knowledge, the effect of <i>G. mosseae</i> on watermelon yield or growth has not been established. Mycorrhizal colonization of watermelon roots with <i>G. mosseae</i> was confirmed in the present study by inspection under a light microscope (data not shown), yet the effect of inoculation on the observed parameters was variable. Although mycorrhizal inoculation enhanced the early and total yield in the third year of the present study, a continuous effect that would support a recommendation as a standard production practice was not observed.</font>    <br> 	</p>  	    <p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>CONCLUSIONS</b></font>    <br> 	      <br>     <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">In conclusion, based on the results of the present study, an in&#45;row plant spacing of 1.0 m enhances the early and total yield while maintaining high fruit weight. Yield enhancement by mycorrhizal colonization was inconsistent; thus, we cannot support the standard application of <i>G. mosseae</i> in commercial watermelon production. The effect of AM colonization remains an open question, and further testing of other AM species may provide more consistent results.</font></p>  	    ]]></body>
<body><![CDATA[<p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="3"><b>LITERATURE CITED</b></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Akiyama, K., and H. Hayashi. 2002. Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus&#45;promoted accumulation of two new triterpenoids in cucumber roots. Bioscience Biotechnology and Biochemistry 66:762&#45;769.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100001&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Ban, D., S. Goreta, and J. Borosic 2006. Plant spacing and cultivar affect melon growth and yield components. Scientia Horticulturae 109:238&#45;243.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100002&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Ban, D., M. Oplanic, A.S. Ilak Persuric, M. Radulovic, B. Novak, I. Zutic, and S. Goreta. 2007. Effects of plug size, mycorrhizae inoculant and growth period on the development of watermelon transplants. Acta Horticulturae 731:137&#45;142.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100003&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Ban, D., K. Zanic, G. Dumicic, T. Gotlin Culjak, and S. Goreta Ban. 2009. The type of polyethylene mulch impacts vegetative growth, yield, and aphid populations in watermelon production. Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment 7:543&#45;550.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100004&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Brinen, G.H., S.J. Locascio, and G.W. Elmstrom. 1979. Plant and row spacing, mulch, and fertilizer rate effects on watermelon production. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 104:724&#45;726.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100005&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Chandanie, W.A., M. Kubota, and M. Hyakumachi. 2006. Interactions between plant growth promoting fungi and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus <i>Glomus mosseae</i> and induction of systemic resistance to anthracnose disease in cucumber. Plant and Soil 286:209&#45;217.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100006&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Duthie, J.A., B.W. Roberts, J.V. Edelson, and J.W. Shrefler. 1999. Plant density&#45;dependent variation in marketable yield, fruit biomass, and marketable fraction in watermelon. Crop Science 39:412&#45;417.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100007&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Edelstein, M., and H. Nerson. 2002. Genotype and plant density affect watermelon grown for seed consumption. HortScience 37:981&#45;983.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100008&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">FAOSTAT. 2010. FAO statistical databases. Agriculture. Available at <a href="http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor" target="_blank">http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor</a> (accessed 17 March 2010).    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100009&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>      <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Goreta, S., S. Perica, G. Dumicic, L. Bucan, and K. Zanic. 2005. Growth and yield of watermelon on polyethylene mulch with different spacings and nitrogen rates. HortScience 40:366&#45;369.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100010&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Huitron&#45;Ramirez, M.V., M. Ricardez&#45;Salinas, and F. Camacho&#45;Ferre. 2009. Influence of grafted watermelon plant density on yield and quality in soil infested with melon necrotic spot virus. HortScience 44:1838&#45;1841.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100011&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Kaya, C., D. Higgs, H. Kirnak, and I. Tas. 2003. Mycorrhizal colonisation improves fruit yield and water use efficiency in watermelon <i>(Citrullus lanatus</i> Thunb.) grown under well&#45;watered and water&#45;stressed conditions. Plant and Soil 253:287&#45;292.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100012&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Knavel, D.E. 1988. Growth, development, and yield potential of short&#45;internode muskmelon. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 113:595&#45;599.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100013&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Maynard, E.T., and W.D. Scott. 1998. Plant spacing affects yield of 'Superstar' muskmelon. HortScience 33:2&#45;54.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100014&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Meding, S.M., and R.J. Zasoski. 2008. Hyphal&#45;mediated transfer of nitrate, arsenic, cesium, rubidium, and strontium between arbuscular mycorrhizal forbs and grasses from a California oak woodland. Soil Biology and Biochemistry 40:126&#45;134.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100015&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Motsenbocker, C.E., and R.A. Arancibia. 2002. In&#45;row spacing influences triploid watermelon yield and crop value. HortTechnology 12:437&#45;440.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100016&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">NeSmith, D.S. 1993. Plant spacing influences watermelon yield and yield components. HortScience 28:885&#45;887.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100017&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p> 	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Robinson, R.W., and D.S. Decker&#45;Walters. 1997. Cucurbits. CAB International, Wallingford, UK.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100018&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p> 	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"> Sanders, D.C., J.D. Cure, and J.R. Schultheis. 1999. Yield response of watermelon to planting density, planting pattern, and polyethylene mulch. HortScience 34:1221&#45;1223.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100019&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Sari, N., O. Ibrahim, and H. Yetisir. 2002. Effect of mycorrhiza inoculation on plant growth, yield, and phosphorous uptake in garlic under field conditions. Communications in Soil Sciences and Plant Analysis 33:2189&#45;2201.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100020&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><br>           <!-- ref --><br>       SAS Institute. 1999. SAS/STAT User's guide. SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100021&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>      <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Sensory, S., S. Demir, O. Turkmen, C. Erdinc, and O.B. Savur. 2007. Responses of some different pepper <i>(Capsicum annum</i> L.) genotypes to inoculation with two different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. Scientia Horticulturae 113:92&#45;95.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100022&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Smith, S.E., and D. Read. 2008. Mycorrhizal symbiosis. 3<sup>rd</sup> ed. Academic Press and Elsevier, London, UK.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100023&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --></font></p>  	    <!-- ref --><p align="justify"><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Westphal, A., N.L. Snyder, L.J. Xing, and J.J. Camberato. 2008. Effects of inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi of soilless potting</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">mixes during transplant production on watermelon growth and</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">early fruit yield. HortScience 43:354&#45;360.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100024&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><br>           <!-- ref --><br>     Zhang, L., J. Zhang, P. Christie, and X. Li. 2008. Pre&#45;inoculation</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi suppresses root knot nematode</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2"><i>(Meloidogyne incognita)</i> on cucumber <i>(Cucumis sativus).</i> Biology</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">and Fertility of Soils 45:205&#45;211.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100025&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><br>         <!-- ref --><br>     Znidarcic, D., and J. Osvald. 1999. The influence of plant density</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">and covering on yield of bell peppers <i>(Capsicum annuum</i> L.). Res.</font> <font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Rep. Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana 73:59&#45;64.    &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[&#160;<a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="javascript: window.open('/scieloOrg/php/reflinks.php?refpid=S0718-5839201100040000100026&pid=S0718-58392011000400001&lng=','','width=640,height=500,resizable=yes,scrollbars=1,menubar=yes,');"></a>&#160;]<!-- end-ref --><br>     </font></p> 	<hr align="left" width="20%" size="1" noshade> 	    <p align="justify"><font face="verdana" size="2">Received: 14 January 2011.</font>    <br>       <font face="verdana" size="2">Accepted: 28 August 2011.</font></p> 	    <p align="justify">&nbsp;</p> 	    <p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>         <p align="justify">&nbsp;</p>      ]]></body><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Akiyama]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hayashi]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus-promoted accumulation of two new triterpenoids in cucumber roots]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Bioscience Biotechnology and Biochemistry]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>66</volume>
<page-range>762-769</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ban]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Goreta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Borosic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Plant spacing and cultivar affect melon growth and yield components]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Scientia Horticulturae]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>109</volume>
<page-range>238-243</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ban]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Oplanic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ilak Persuric]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A.S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Radulovic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Novak]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zutic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Goreta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Effects of plug size, mycorrhizae inoculant and growth period on the development of watermelon transplants]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Acta Horticulturae]]></source>
<year>2007</year>
<volume>731</volume>
<page-range>137-142</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ban]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zanic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Dumicic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Gotlin Culjak]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[T]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Goreta Ban]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The type of polyethylene mulch impacts vegetative growth, yield, and aphid populations in watermelon production]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of Food Agriculture and Environment]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>7</volume>
<page-range>543-550</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Brinen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.H]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Locascio]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Elmstrom]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G.W]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Plant and row spacing, mulch, and fertilizer rate effects on watermelon production]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science]]></source>
<year>1979</year>
<volume>104</volume>
<page-range>724-726</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Chandanie]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W.A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kubota]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Hyakumachi]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Interactions between plant growth promoting fungi and arbuscular mycorrhizal fungus Glomus mosseae and induction of systemic resistance to anthracnose disease in cucumber]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Plant and Soil]]></source>
<year>2006</year>
<volume>286</volume>
<page-range>209-217</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Duthie]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Roberts]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[B.W]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Edelson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.V]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Shrefler]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.W]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Plant density-dependent variation in marketable yield, fruit biomass, and marketable fraction in watermelon]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Crop Science]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<volume>39</volume>
<page-range>412-417</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Edelstein]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Nerson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Genotype and plant density affect watermelon grown for seed consumption]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[HortScience]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>37</volume>
<page-range>981-983</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<collab>FAOSTAT</collab>
<source><![CDATA[FAO statistical databases: Agriculture]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Goreta]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Perica]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Dumicic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[G]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bucan]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zanic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Growth and yield of watermelon on polyethylene mulch with different spacings and nitrogen rates]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[HortScience]]></source>
<year>2005</year>
<volume>40</volume>
<page-range>366-369</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Huitron-Ramirez]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M.V]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ricardez-Salinas]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Camacho-Ferre]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[F]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Influence of grafted watermelon plant density on yield and quality in soil infested with melon necrotic spot virus]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[HortScience]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
<volume>44</volume>
<page-range>1838-1841</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kaya]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Higgs]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Kirnak]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Tas]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[I]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Mycorrhizal colonisation improves fruit yield and water use efficiency in watermelon (Citrullus lanatus Thunb.) grown under well-watered and water-stressed conditions]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Plant and Soil]]></source>
<year>2003</year>
<volume>253</volume>
<page-range>287-292</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Knavel]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.E]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Growth, development, and yield potential of short-internode muskmelon]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science]]></source>
<year>1988</year>
<volume>113</volume>
<page-range>595-599</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B14">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Maynard]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E.T]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Scott]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[W.D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Plant spacing affects yield of 'Superstar' muskmelon]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[HortScience]]></source>
<year>1998</year>
<volume>33</volume>
<page-range>2-54</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B15">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Meding]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.M]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zasoski]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Hyphal-mediated transfer of nitrate, arsenic, cesium, rubidium, and strontium between arbuscular mycorrhizal forbs and grasses from a California oak woodland]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Soil Biology and Biochemistry]]></source>
<year>2008</year>
<volume>40</volume>
<page-range>126-134</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B16">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Motsenbocker]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C.E]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Arancibia]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.A]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[In-row spacing influences triploid watermelon yield and crop value]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[HortTechnology]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>12</volume>
<page-range>437-440</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B17">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[NeSmith]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Plant spacing influences watermelon yield and yield components]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[HortScience]]></source>
<year>1993</year>
<volume>28</volume>
<page-range>885-887</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B18">
<nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Robinson]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R.W]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Decker-Walters]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.S]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Cucurbits. CAB International]]></source>
<year>1997</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Wallingford ]]></publisher-loc>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B19">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sanders]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D.C]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Cure]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[HortScience]]></source>
<year></year>
<volume>34</volume>
<page-range>1221-1223</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B20">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sari]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Ibrahim]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[O]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Yetisir]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[H]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Communications in Soil Sciences and Plant Analysis]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>33</volume>
<page-range>2189-2201</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B21">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<collab>SAS Institute</collab>
<source><![CDATA[SAS/STAT User's guide]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[Cary^eNorth Carolina North Carolina]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[SAS Institute]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B22">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Sensory]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Demir]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Turkmen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[O]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Erdinc]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Savur]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[O.B]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Responses of some different pepper (Capsicum annum L.) genotypes to inoculation with two different arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Scientia Horticulturae]]></source>
<year>2007</year>
<volume>113</volume>
<page-range>92-95</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B23">
<nlm-citation citation-type="book">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Smith]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[S.E]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Read]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Mycorrhizal symbiosis]]></source>
<year>2008</year>
<edition>3</edition>
<publisher-loc><![CDATA[London ]]></publisher-loc>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Academic Press and Elsevier]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B24">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Westphal]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[A]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Snyder]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[N.L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Xing]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L.J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Camberato]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Effects of inoculation with mycorrhizal fungi of soilless potting mixes during transplant production on watermelon growth and early fruit yield]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[HortScience]]></source>
<year>2008</year>
<volume>43</volume>
<page-range>354-360</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B25">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zhang]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[L]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Zhang]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Christie]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Li]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[X]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[Pre-inoculation with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi suppresses root knot nematode (Meloidogyne incognita) on cucumber (Cucumis sativus)]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Biology and Fertility of Soils]]></source>
<year>2008</year>
<volume>45</volume>
<page-range>205-211</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B26">
<nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Znidarcic]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[D]]></given-names>
</name>
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Osvald]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[The influence of plant density and covering on yield of bell peppers (Capsicum annuum L.)]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Res. Rep. Biotechnical Faculty]]></source>
<year>1999</year>
<volume>73</volume>
<page-range>59-64</page-range><publisher-name><![CDATA[University of Ljubljana]]></publisher-name>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
