Paper · 2010 · Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

Mechanical flower thinning improves the fruit quality of apples

Alexey A Solomakhin; Michael M Blanke

11
claims
28
verbatim quotes
79
citations
5
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Apple 'Golden Delicious Reinders' and 'Gala Mondial' trees were mechanically blossom-thinned with 30-77 x g (300-480 rpm rotation) and 5 or 7.5 km h(-1) vehicle speed to improve fruit quality, minimise leaf damage, reduce hand and chemical thinning and to prevent or overcome alternate bearing; adjacent untreated or manually thinned apple trees served as controls. RESULTS: Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger), firmness (8.4 in Gala vs. 7.6 kg cm(-2) in the unthinned control), sweetness (124 vs. 117 g kg(-1) sugar in the control), contained the largest malic acid content (4 g kg(-1) vs. 3.4 g kg(-1) in the control) and 17% more anthocyanin (normalised anthocyanin index = 0.8 in Gala vs. 0.7 in the control); fruit of Golden and Gala showed additionally advanced starch breakdown and ripened earlier. CONCLUSIONS: Since increases in rotor speed, viz. centrifugal force, versus increases in the vehicle speed resulted in opposing effects, an integrated coefficient of thinning (ICT) was devised with optimum values of 10-40 (at 43 x g, 5-7.5 km h(-1)), where an ICT > 50 led to tree damage and ICT < 8 led to sub-optimum thinning efficacy.

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mechanical thinning increased fruit size by 15%.

Treatment
Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1))e0
Outcome
fruit sizee0
Direction
largere0
Value
15%e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 387–489 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mechanical thinning raised Gala firmness to 8.4 versus 7.6 kg cm(-2) in controls.

Material
Galae0
Treatment
Mechanical thinninge1
Outcome
firmnesse0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
8.4e0
Qualifier
7.6 kg cm(-2)e0
Comparator
unthinned controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“firmness (8.4 in Gala vs. 7.6 kg cm(-2) in the unthinned control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 491–556 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 387–489 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mechanical thinning raised sweetness to 124 versus 117 g kg(-1) sugar.

Treatment
Mechanical thinninge1
Outcome
sweetnesse0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
124e0
Qualifier
117 g kg(-1) sugare0
Comparator
controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“sweetness (124 vs. 117 g kg(-1) sugar in the control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 558–611 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 387–489 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mechanical thinning produced the largest malic acid content.

Treatment
Mechanical thinninge1
Outcome
malic acid contente0
Direction
largeste0
Value
4 g kg(-1)e0
Qualifier
3.4 g kg(-1)e0
Comparator
controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“contained the largest malic acid content (4 g kg(-1) vs. 3.4 g kg(-1) in the control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 613–698 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 387–489 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Mechanical thinning increased anthocyanin by 17%.

Treatment
Mechanical thinninge1
Outcome
anthocyanine0
Direction
moree0
Value
17%e0
Qualifier
normalised anthocyanin index = 0.8 in Gala vs. 0.7 in the controle0
Comparator
controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“17% more anthocyanin (normalised anthocyanin index = 0.8 in Gala vs. 0.7 in the control)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 703–791 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 387–489 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Golden and Gala fruit showed advanced starch breakdown.

Material
Golden and Galae0
Treatment
Mechanical thinninge1
Outcome
starch breakdowne0
Direction
advancede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fruit of Golden and Gala showed additionally advanced starch breakdown”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 793–863 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 387–489 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Golden and Gala fruit ripened earlier.

Material
Golden and Galae0
Treatment
Mechanical thinninge1
Outcome
ripenede0
Direction
earliere0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fruit of Golden and Gala showed additionally advanced starch breakdown and ripened earlier”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 793–883 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
e1

“Mechanical thinning (43 x g, 360 rpm, 5-7.5 km h(-1)) had a positive effect on fruit size (15% larger)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 387–489 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Rotor and vehicle speed increases had opposing effects.

Outcome
opposing effectse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“increases in rotor speed, viz. centrifugal force, versus increases in the vehicle speed resulted in opposing effects”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 904–1020 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The integrated thinning coefficient had optimum values of 10-40.

Outcome
integrated coefficient of thinning (ICT)e0
Value
10-40e0
Qualifier
at 43 x g, 5-7.5 km h(-1)e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“an integrated coefficient of thinning (ICT) was devised with optimum values of 10-40 (at 43 x g, 5-7.5 km h(-1))”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1134 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ICT above 50 led to tree damage.

Outcome
tree damagee0
Value
ICT > 50e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“an ICT > 50 led to tree damage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1142–1172 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ICT below 8 led to suboptimal thinning efficacy.

Outcome
sub-optimum thinning efficacye0
Value
ICT < 8e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“ICT < 8 led to sub-optimum thinning efficacy”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1177–1221 · show in text ↑
t0

“apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 57–63 · show in text ↑

pruning · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

35 papers: 23 positive, 12 negative or no effect

22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

31 papers more in this group

See all 35 papers →

pruning · quality: sugar starch · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

47 papers: 21 positive, 26 negative or no effect

20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 25 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 papers →

pruning · quality: phytochemicals · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 10 positive, 5 negative or no effect

9 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

pruning · molecular: metabolites · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

19 papers: 11 positive, 8 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. negative

15 papers more in this group

See all 19 papers →

pruning · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

147 papers: 100 positive, 47 negative or no effect

99 papers in the same direction as this paper · 47 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. positive
  3. negative

143 papers more in this group

See all 147 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.