Abstract
Excessive vegetative growth in peach ( Prunus persica ) causes canopy shading that reduces fruit bud initiation in the canopy interior and increases pruning costs and time. Sod competition can reduce pruning but may also reduce yield. The objective of the present study was to measure the effects of increased sod competition [2- vs. 8-ft-wide vegetation-free areas (VFA)] on yield and quality of irrigated peach. Total pruning weight was reduced by sod competition in the first 4 of 7 cropping years. Subsequent years indicated no effect on vegetative growth due to sod competition. Annual increase in trunk cross-sectional area was reduced by sod competition in the first year of cropping and unaffected in subsequent years. Canopy development was reduced by sod competition in the first 2 years of cropping, which increased photosynthetically active radiation transmission through the canopy and increased fruit red color in the first year. The width of the VFA did not alter the relationship between total fruit number and total yield in any year; however, the total number of fruit per tree was reduced in all years and total yield was reduced in 6 of 7 years. Results suggest that dormant season pruning was removing a higher percentage of the crop bearing wood from the 2-ft VFA compared with the 8-ft VFA treatment, resulting in reduced yield per unit of dormant pruning. This indicates that pruning practices must be modified to leave more bearing wood in mature trees to maintain yield potential when sod competition is used to control vegetative growth.
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
Sod competition reduced pruning weight in the first four cropping years.
- Taxon
- peach
Prunus persicae1 - Treatment
- sod competitione0
- Outcome
- Total pruning weighte0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- first 4 of 7 cropping yearse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total pruning weight was reduced by sod competition in the first 4 of 7 cropping years”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Sod competition had no effect on vegetative growth in later years.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- sod competitione0
- Outcome
- vegetative growthe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Subsequent years indicated no effect on vegetative growth due to sod competition”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Sod competition reduced annual trunk area increase in the first cropping year.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- sod competitione0
- Outcome
- Annual increase in trunk cross-sectional areae0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- first year of croppinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Annual increase in trunk cross-sectional area was reduced by sod competition in the first year of cropping”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Trunk area increase was unaffected in later years.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- sod competitione0
- Outcome
- Annual increase in trunk cross-sectional areae0
- Direction
- unaffectede0
- Qualifier
- subsequent yearse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Annual increase in trunk cross-sectional area was reduced by sod competition in the first year of cropping and unaffected in subsequent years”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Sod competition reduced canopy development in the first two cropping years.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- sod competitione0
- Outcome
- Canopy developmente0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Canopy development was reduced by sod competition in the first 2 years of cropping”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduced canopy development increased light transmission through the canopy.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Outcome
- photosynthetically active radiation transmission through the canopye0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increased photosynthetically active radiation transmission through the canopy”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit red color increased in the first year.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Outcome
- fruit red colore0
- Direction
- increasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increased fruit red color in the first year”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
VFA width did not change the relation between fruit number and yield.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- width of the VFAe0
- Outcome
- relationship between total fruit number and total yielde0
- Direction
- did not altere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The width of the VFA did not alter the relationship between total fruit number and total yield in any year”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit number per tree was reduced in all years.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- sod competitione2
- Outcome
- total number of fruit per treee0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- 8-ft-wide vegetation-free arease2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“total number of fruit per tree was reduced in all years”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
e2“sod competition [2- vs. 8-ft-wide vegetation-free areas (VFA)]”
Claim · model-written summary
Total yield declined in six of seven years.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- sod competitione2
- Outcome
- total yielde0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- 8-ft-wide vegetation-free arease2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“total yield was reduced in 6 of 7 years”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
e2“sod competition [2- vs. 8-ft-wide vegetation-free areas (VFA)]”
Claim · model-written summary
Dormant pruning appeared to remove a larger proportion of bearing wood under the narrower VFA.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Treatment
- dormant season pruninge0
- Outcome
- higher percentage of the crop bearing woode0
- Comparator
- 8-ft VFA treatmente0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“dormant season pruning was removing a higher percentage of the crop bearing wood from the 2-ft VFA compared with the 8-ft VFA treatment”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Yield per unit of dormant pruning was reduced.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Outcome
- yield per unit of dormant pruninge0
- Direction
- reducede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“resulting in reduced yield per unit of dormant pruning”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
Claim · model-written summary
Pruning practices should leave more bearing wood when sod competition is used.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicae1
- Outcome
- leave more bearing wood in mature treese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“pruning practices must be modified to leave more bearing wood in mature trees to maintain yield potential when sod competition is used”
e1“peach ( Prunus persica )”
The same questions in other papers
competition · growth · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
competition · yield · Prunus persica (peach)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
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.