Abstract

ABSTRACT Zweigelt grapes have recently become susceptible to infestation with Traubenwelke (grape wilting) and the susceptibility has been assumed to be related to potassium (K) deficiency. The aim of the studies was to determine the effects of foliar application of K on leaf K content, leaf gas exchange, and on infestation of grapes with Traubenwelke. Three foliar fertilizers of K (Agripotash, 27.4% K; Nutrileaf, 33.2% K; and KNO3, 38.7% K) and one of magnesium (Mg) (Agrovit Mg, 4.8% Mg) were tested on grapevines (Vitis vinifera, L. cv. ‘Zweigelt’) in field studies in 2003 and 2004. Foliar analysis showed that the tested foliar fertilizers had no effect on leaf K content in either year. Furthermore, the frequency of infestation with grape wilting was not reduced by K fertilizers. Measurements of leaf gas exchange in 2004 showed that all fertilizer treatments reduced photosynthesis (A) and stomatal conductance (gs) compared with the untreated control.

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 3

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Foliar K fertilizers had no effect on leaf K content in either year.

Taxon
Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
Material
Zweigeltt0
Treatment
Three foliar fertilizers of Ke0
Outcome
leaf K contente1
Direction
no effecte1
Qualifier
in either yeare1

Not reportedComparator

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

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Response of Zweigelt Grapevine to Foliar Application of Potassium Fertilizer: Effects on Gas Exchange, Leaf Potassium Content, and Incidence of Traubenwelke”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–156 · show in text ↑
e0

“Three foliar fertilizers of K (Agripotash, 27.4% K; Nutrileaf, 33.2% K; and KNO3, 38.7% K) and one of magnesium (Mg) (Agrovit Mg, 4.8% Mg) were tested on grapevines (Vitis vinifera, L. cv.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–543 · show in text ↑
e1

“Foliar analysis showed that the tested foliar fertilizers had no effect on leaf K content in either year”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 591–695 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

K fertilizers did not reduce the frequency of grape wilting infestation.

Taxon
Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
Material
Zweigeltt0
Treatment
K fertilizerse2
Outcome
frequency of infestation with grape wiltinge2
Direction
not reducede2

Not reportedComparator

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

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Response of Zweigelt Grapevine to Foliar Application of Potassium Fertilizer: Effects on Gas Exchange, Leaf Potassium Content, and Incidence of Traubenwelke”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–156 · show in text ↑
e0

“Three foliar fertilizers of K (Agripotash, 27.4% K; Nutrileaf, 33.2% K; and KNO3, 38.7% K) and one of magnesium (Mg) (Agrovit Mg, 4.8% Mg) were tested on grapevines (Vitis vinifera, L. cv.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–543 · show in text ↑
e2

“Furthermore, the frequency of infestation with grape wilting was not reduced by K fertilizers”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 697–790 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All fertilizer treatments reduced photosynthesis and stomatal conductance compared with the untreated control in 2004.

Taxon
Vitis viniferaVitis viniferae0
Material
Zweigeltt0
Treatment
all fertilizer treatmentse3
Outcome
photosynthesis (A) and stomatal conductance (gs)e3
Direction
reducede3
Qualifier
in 2004e3
Comparator
untreated controle3

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

Vitis vinifera
Vitis vinifera · TaxonDarijanus · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Response of Zweigelt Grapevine to Foliar Application of Potassium Fertilizer: Effects on Gas Exchange, Leaf Potassium Content, and Incidence of Traubenwelke”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 0–156 · show in text ↑
e0

“Three foliar fertilizers of K (Agripotash, 27.4% K; Nutrileaf, 33.2% K; and KNO3, 38.7% K) and one of magnesium (Mg) (Agrovit Mg, 4.8% Mg) were tested on grapevines (Vitis vinifera, L. cv.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 355–543 · show in text ↑
e3

“Measurements of leaf gas exchange in 2004 showed that all fertilizer treatments reduced photosynthesis (A) and stomatal conductance (gs) compared with the untreated control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 792–964 · show in text ↑

fertilization · physiology: photosynthesis · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

fertilization · disease · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

3 papers: 1 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
See all 3 papers →

application · nutrient: content · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 10 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 papers →

fertilization · nutrient: content · Vitis vinifera (wine grape)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 11 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 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.