Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 528

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 65 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Achieving environmentally sustainable growing media for soilless plant cultivation systems – A review

Open access
Barrett, G.E., Alexander, P.D., Robinson, J.S., Bragg, N.C.·2016·Scientia Horticulturae
DOI 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.09.030
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Soilless cultivation is recognized globally for its ability to support efficient and intensive plant production. While production systems vary, most utilize a porous substrate or growing medium for plant provision of water and nutrients. Until relatively recently, the main drivers for the selection of the component materials in growing media were largely based on performance and economic considerations. However, increasing concern over the environmental impacts of some commonly used materials, has led researchers to identify and assess more environmentally sound alternatives. There has been an understandable focus on renewable materials from agricultural, industrial and municipal waste streams; while many of these show promise at an experimental level, few have been taken up on a significant scale. To ensure continued growth and sustainable development of soilless cultivation, it is vital that effective and environmentally sustainable materials for growing media are identified. Here we describe the factors influencing material selection, and review the most commonly used organic materials in relation to these. We summarise some of the renewable, primary and waste stream materials that have been investigated to date, highlighting the benefits and challenges associated with their uptake. In response to the need for researchers to better identify promising new materials, we present an evidence-based argument for a more consistent approach to characterising growing media and for a clearer understanding of the practical and economic realities of modern soilless cultivation systems.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scienta.2016.09.030

Cites

65 of 65 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 528

Metadata

Authors
Barrett, G. E., Alexander, P. D., Robinson, J. S., & Bragg, N. C.
Venue
Scientia Horticulturae
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-11
Volume
212
Pages
220-234
ISSN
0304-4238 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.scienta.2016.09.030
OpenAlex
W2529361197
Cited by
528
References
65
FWCI
23.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.