Abstract
Light microclimate, yield components, and fruit composition were investigated from 1999 to 2002 on vines growing in the Niagara Peninsula in Ontario, Canada. Six training systems (four cane-pruned: four-cane Kniffin, two-tier flatbow, Scott Henry, pendelbogen; and two spur-pruned: low cordon, vertiko), two cultivars (Chardonnay clone 96 and Cabernet franc clone 331), and two rootstocks (Kober 5BB and Riparia Gloire de Montpellier) were investigated in a 6 x 2 x 2 split-split plot design, with training system as the main factor, followed by cultivar and then rootstock. Over the four-year study, Cabernet franc had higher yields (13%) in the cane-versus the spurpruned systems. Chardonnay showed the same trend, but pendelbogen had the highest yield among the cane-pruned systems (26% greater than spur-pruned). The lowest yielding systems, low cordon and vertiko, produced fruit with the highest mean Brix over the four-year period in both cultivars, although the low-cordon canopy had a high leaf layer number, while vertiko had a low leaf layer number during the first two years of study. Must pH and titratable acidity were generally not affected by training system. Vines growing on 5BB rootstock produced greater yields, pruning weights, and had lower crop-load ratios compared to vines growing on Riparia. Vines with Riparia rootstock produced fruit higher in Brix in two of the four years.
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
Claim · model-written summary
Cabernet franc yield was 13% higher in cane-pruned than spur-pruned systems.
- Material
- Cabernet france0
- Treatment
- canee0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 13%e0
- Comparator
- spurpruned systemse0
VitisOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Cabernet franc had higher yields (13%) in the cane-versus the spurpruned systems.”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Chardonnay pendelbogen yield was 26% greater than spur-pruned systems.
- Material
- Chardonnaye0
- Treatment
- pendelbogene0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- greatere0
- Value
- 26%e0
- Comparator
- spur-prunede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Chardonnay showed the same trend, but pendelbogen had the highest yield among the cane-pruned systems (26% greater than spur-pruned).”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Low cordon and vertiko had the lowest yields.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest yielding systems, low cordon and vertiko, produced fruit with the highest mean Brix over the four-year period in both cultivars”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Low cordon and vertiko produced the highest mean Brix in both cultivars.
- Treatment
- low cordon and vertikoe0
- Outcome
- mean Brixe0
- Direction
- higheste0
- Qualifier
- over the four-year period in both cultivarse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest yielding systems, low cordon and vertiko, produced fruit with the highest mean Brix over the four-year period in both cultivars”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Low cordon had high leaf layer number in the first two years.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the low-cordon canopy had a high leaf layer number, while vertiko had a low leaf layer number during the first two years of study”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Vertiko had low leaf layer number in the first two years.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the low-cordon canopy had a high leaf layer number, while vertiko had a low leaf layer number during the first two years of study”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Training system generally did not affect must pH and titratable acidity.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Must pH and titratable acidity were generally not affected by training system.”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
5BB rootstock increased yield relative to Riparia.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vines growing on 5BB rootstock produced greater yields, pruning weights, and had lower crop-load ratios compared to vines growing on Riparia.”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
5BB rootstock increased pruning weights relative to Riparia.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vines growing on 5BB rootstock produced greater yields, pruning weights, and had lower crop-load ratios compared to vines growing on Riparia.”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
5BB rootstock lowered crop-load ratios relative to Riparia.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vines growing on 5BB rootstock produced greater yields, pruning weights, and had lower crop-load ratios compared to vines growing on Riparia.”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Riparia rootstock produced fruit higher in Brix in two of four years.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vines with Riparia rootstock produced fruit higher in Brix in two of the four years.”
t0“Grapevines”
The same questions in other papers
grafting · yield · VitisResults differ
20 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 papers →grafting · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 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.