Abstract
Abstract The formation of blind shoots and malformed flowers in rose plants grown under various temperatures and light intensities, and subjected to different cut back procedures has been studied. Low temperature, low light intensity and low cut back promoted blind shoot formation. Hybrid tea cultivars are more sensitive for unfavourable temperature, light and cut back treatments than Floribunda cultivars. The process of floral abortion is initiated during the early stages of shoot growth before the differentiation of floral parts has been completed. Low temperatures (12–15°C) in this critical stage of development strongly promote blind shoot formation, but have no effect when stamen and pistil primordia had been formed in the apical flower bud. The formation of malformed flowers, so‐called “bullheads”, which have significantly more petals than normal flowers, is also promoted by low temperature and low cut back. Light intensity seems to have no effect. Shoots subjected to low temperature (12°C) during the early stages of development, before the differentiation of the floral organs are fully completed, produce malformed flowers to a greater extent than shoots subjected to high temperature (18–24°C) during this period. It is suggested that blind shoot formation in roses is subject to hormonal 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 13
Claim · model-written summary
Low temperature promoted blind shoots.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low temperature, low light intensity and low cut back promoted blind shoot formation.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Low light intensity promoted blind shoots.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low temperature, low light intensity and low cut back promoted blind shoot formation.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Low cutback promoted blind shoots.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low temperature, low light intensity and low cut back promoted blind shoot formation.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Hybrid tea cultivars were more sensitive to unfavorable treatments than Floribunda cultivars.
Verbatim
e0“Hybrid tea cultivars are more sensitive for unfavourable temperature, light and cut back treatments than Floribunda cultivars.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Floral abortion began early in shoot growth before floral parts differentiated.
Verbatim
e0“The process of floral abortion is initiated during the early stages of shoot growth before the differentiation of floral parts has been completed.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Temperatures of 12–15°C strongly promoted blind shoots during the critical early stage.
- Taxon
- Rosest0
- Treatment
- Low temperatures (12–15°C)e0
- Outcome
- blind shoot formatione0
- Direction
- strongly promotee0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low temperatures (12–15°C) in this critical stage of development strongly promote blind shoot formation”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Low temperature had no effect after stamen and pistil primordia formed.
- Taxon
- Rosest0
- Organ / stage
- stamen and pistil primordiae0
- Treatment
- Low temperatures (12–15°C)e0
- Outcome
- no effecte0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Low temperatures (12–15°C) in this critical stage of development strongly promote blind shoot formation, but have no effect when stamen and pistil primordia had been formed in the apical flower bud.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Low temperature promoted malformed rose flowers.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The formation of malformed flowers, so‐called “bullheads”, which have significantly more petals than normal flowers, is also promoted by low temperature and low cut back.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Low cutback promoted malformed rose flowers.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The formation of malformed flowers, so‐called “bullheads”, which have significantly more petals than normal flowers, is also promoted by low temperature and low cut back.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Malformed flowers had significantly more petals.
Verbatim
e0“which have significantly more petals than normal flowers”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Light intensity appeared not to affect malformed flower formation.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The formation of malformed flowers, so‐called “bullheads”, which have significantly more petals than normal flowers, is also promoted by low temperature and low cut back. Light intensity seems to have no effect.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Early exposure to 12°C produced more malformed flowers than 18–24°C.
Verbatim
e0“Shoots subjected to low temperature (12°C) during the early stages of development, before the differentiation of the floral organs are fully completed, produce malformed flowers to a greater extent than shoots subjected to high temperature (18–24°C) during this period.”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest hormonal control of blind shoot formation.
Verbatim
e0“It is suggested that blind shoot formation in roses is subject to hormonal control.”
The same questions in other papers
cold · growth · RosaPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →light · phenology · RosaPositive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 12 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →light · growth · RosaPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 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.