Paper · 2007 · Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture

Overcoming adverse effects of hailnets on fruit quality and microclimate in an apple orchard

Alexej A Solomakhin; Michael M Blanke

16
claims
41
verbatim quotes
71
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

BACKGROUND: With the increase of hailstorms as a possible result of global warming, fruit crops are increasingly grown under hailnets. This results in lesser fruit quality in terms of colouration, fruit mass, firmness, starch and taste, i.e. sugar and acid, and vitamin content under hailnet due to altered microclimate and light deprivation. Reflective mulches (Extenday and Daybright) were spread in autumn 2006 to improve fruit quality and light utilisation under hailnet at Klein-Altendorf Research Station near Bonn, Germany. A monophosphate (Seniphos) was applied twice for the same purpose; untreated apple cv. 'Elstar' trees served as control. RESULTS: Under the translucent, 'white' hailnet, humidity was increased by ca. 6%, air temperature reduced by ca. 1.6 °C, soil temperature increased by ca. 0.5 °C and light reduced by 11-15% resulting in lesser fruit quality of 2.5% less sugar and less taste. The two reflective mulches increased light reflection at 45° and 90° angles by 2.5- to 6.3-fold. No differences in fruit ripening and firmness were observed, but fruit from trees under hailnet with reflective mulch contained up to 2.4% (from 13.3 to 15.7%) more sugar than those of the control (uncovered grass alleys). A less negative normalised differential vegetation index (NDVI) of - 0.3 on the red compared with - 0.5 on the green fruit side indicated more chlorophyll in the outer, sun-exposed, red side of the apples relative to the shaded side. Monophosphate-treated fruits maintained the peel chlorophyll with a greener ground colour of 92-97° hue and a NDVI of - 0.3 as in the grassed control. Fruit in the lower canopy with reflective mulch were darker red (a value 30; 22° hue) relative to the grassed control with a = 25 and 43° hue (light red), expressed in a 4-fold increase in normalised anthocyanin index (NAI), but showed enhanced chlorophyll breakdown (NDVI from - 0.2 to - 0.5); similarly, the monophosphate increased the NAI by up to 2.5-fold. CONCLUSIONS: The effect of both reflective mulch cloths was most pronounced on apple fruit in the lower canopy under hailnet, which developed large vitamin C contents and a dark red top colour relative to the grassed control with enhanced chlorophyll breakdown. Both reflective mulch cloths increased the percentage of class I fruit with > 25% colouration by 12% (from 82 to 94%) without and under hailnet by 23% (from 69 to 89%) relative to the grassed control resulting in financial net gains of up to 1300 € ha(-1) Copyright © 2007 Society of Chemical Industry.

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 16

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

White hailnet increased humidity by about 6%.

Treatment
translucent, 'white' hailnete0
Outcome
humiditye0
Direction
increasede0
Value
ca. 6%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

“Under the translucent, 'white' hailnet, humidity was increased by ca. 6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 661–733 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

White hailnet reduced air temperature by about 1.6 °C.

Treatment
hailnett1
Outcome
air temperaturee0
Direction
reducede0
Value
ca. 1.6 °Ce0

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

“air temperature reduced by ca. 1.6 °C”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 735–772 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“Under the translucent, 'white' hailnet, humidity was increased by ca. 6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 661–733 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

White hailnet increased soil temperature by about 0.5 °C.

Treatment
hailnett1
Outcome
soil temperaturee0
Direction
increasede0
Value
ca. 0.5 °Ce0

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

“soil temperature increased by ca. 0.5 °C”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 774–814 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“Under the translucent, 'white' hailnet, humidity was increased by ca. 6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 661–733 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

White hailnet reduced light by 11-15%.

Treatment
hailnett1
Outcome
lighte0
Direction
reducede0
Value
11-15%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

“light reduced by 11-15%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 819–842 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“Under the translucent, 'white' hailnet, humidity was increased by ca. 6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 661–733 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

White hailnet reduced fruit sugar by 2.5%.

Treatment
hailnett1
Outcome
sugare0
Direction
lesse0
Value
2.5%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

“2.5% less sugar and less taste”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 880–910 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“Under the translucent, 'white' hailnet, humidity was increased by ca. 6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 661–733 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

White hailnet reduced fruit taste.

Treatment
hailnett1
Outcome
tastee0
Direction
lesse0

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

“less taste”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 900–910 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“Under the translucent, 'white' hailnet, humidity was increased by ca. 6%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 661–733 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulches increased light reflection by 2.5- to 6.3-fold.

Treatment
two reflective mulchese0
Outcome
light reflectione0
Direction
increasede0
Value
2.5- to 6.3-folde0

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

“The two reflective mulches increased light reflection at 45° and 90° angles by 2.5- to 6.3-fold”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 912–1007 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulch did not change fruit ripening or firmness.

Treatment
reflective mulcht1
Outcome
fruit ripening and firmnesse0
Direction
No differencese0

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

“No differences in fruit ripening and firmness were observed”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1009–1068 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“fruit from trees under hailnet with reflective mulch contained up to 2.4% (from 13.3 to 15.7%) more sugar than those of the control (uncovered grass alleys)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1074–1230 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulch under hailnet increased apple sugar by up to 2.4%.

Treatment
reflective mulche0
Outcome
sugare0
Direction
moree0
Value
up to 2.4%e0
Comparator
control (uncovered grass alleys)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

“fruit from trees under hailnet with reflective mulch contained up to 2.4% (from 13.3 to 15.7%) more sugar than those of the control (uncovered grass alleys)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1074–1230 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Monophosphate maintained peel chlorophyll with a greener ground colour.

Treatment
Monophosphatee0
Outcome
peel chlorophylle0
Direction
maintainede0
Value
92-97° huee0

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

“Monophosphate-treated fruits maintained the peel chlorophyll with a greener ground colour of 92-97° hue”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1466–1569 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulch gave lower-canopy fruit a darker red color.

Treatment
reflective mulche0
Outcome
darker rede0
Direction
darkere0
Value
22° huee0
Comparator
grassed 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

“Fruit in the lower canopy with reflective mulch were darker red (a value 30; 22° hue) relative to the grassed control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1617–1734 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulch increased normalized anthocyanin index fourfold.

Treatment
reflective mulcht1
Outcome
normalised anthocyanin index (NAI)e0
Direction
increasee0
Value
4-folde0

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

“a 4-fold increase in normalised anthocyanin index (NAI)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1785–1840 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“fruit from trees under hailnet with reflective mulch contained up to 2.4% (from 13.3 to 15.7%) more sugar than those of the control (uncovered grass alleys)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1074–1230 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulch enhanced chlorophyll breakdown.

Treatment
reflective mulcht1
Outcome
chlorophyll breakdowne0
Direction
enhancede0
Value
from - 0.2 to - 0.5e0

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

“showed enhanced chlorophyll breakdown (NDVI from - 0.2 to - 0.5)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1846–1910 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“fruit from trees under hailnet with reflective mulch contained up to 2.4% (from 13.3 to 15.7%) more sugar than those of the control (uncovered grass alleys)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1074–1230 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Monophosphate increased NAI by up to 2.5-fold.

Treatment
monophosphatee0
Outcome
NAIe0
Direction
increasede0
Value
up to 2.5-folde0

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

“the monophosphate increased the NAI by up to 2.5-fold”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1923–1976 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulch increased class I fruit with over 25% color by 12% without hailnet.

Treatment
reflective mulch clothse0
Outcome
percentage of class I fruit with > 25% colouratione0
Direction
increasede0
Value
12%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

“Both reflective mulch cloths increased the percentage of class I fruit with > 25% colouration by 12% (from 82 to 94%) without”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2240–2365 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Reflective mulch increased class I fruit with over 25% color by 23% under hailnet.

Treatment
reflective mulch clothst1
Outcome
class I fruit with > 25% colourationt1
Value
23%e0
Comparator
grassed controle0

Not reportedDirection

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“under hailnet by 23% (from 69 to 89%) relative to the grassed control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2370–2439 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 79–84 · show in text ↑
t1

“Both reflective mulch cloths increased the percentage of class I fruit with > 25% colouration by 12% (from 82 to 94%) without and under hailnet by 23% (from 69 to 89%) relative to the grassed control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2240–2439 · show in text ↑

mulching · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 6 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

mulching · molecular: metabolites · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 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.