Abstract
SummaryThe role of light quality and quantity in regulating growth and differentiation of Prunus persica plants was evaluated using different coloured filters in an outdoor experiment. Examination of total growth showed that neutral shading (80% of transparent control) did not affect shoot length, internode elongation, leaf number, and branching, but strongly influenced the anatomical characteristics of leaves. The combination blue + far red (B + FR) acted quite differently from the combination red + far red (R + FR) and caused a general inhibition of growth phenomena. Shorter and more compact plants were produced under B + FR tunnels where the reduction in shoot elongation was consistent with the reduction in internode length. Furthermore, light transmitted through the B + FR filter resulted in lower branching and in smaller and thinner leaves compared with those grown under the other light treatments. The number of flowers was not affected by either light quality or quantity. The negative effect on growth and development of the light environment under B + FR was associated with low Pfr (far red light absorbing form of phytochrome) and with the action of blue light.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Neutral shading did not affect shoot length, internode elongation, leaf number, or branching.
- Taxon
- peach plants
Prunus persicat0 - Treatment
- neutral shadinge0
- Outcome
- shoot length, internode elongation, leaf number, and branchinge0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
- Value
- 80%e0
- Comparator
- transparent controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“neutral shading (80% of transparent control) did not affect shoot length, internode elongation, leaf number, and branching”
t0“peach plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Neutral shading strongly affected leaf anatomy.
- Taxon
- peach plantsPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- neutral shadinge0
- Outcome
- anatomical characteristics of leavese0
- Comparator
- transparent controle0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“neutral shading (80% of transparent control) did not affect shoot length, internode elongation, leaf number, and branching, but strongly influenced the anatomical characteristics of leaves”
t0“peach plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Blue plus far red light inhibited growth and produced shorter, more compact plants than red plus far red light.
- Taxon
- peach plantsPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- B + FRe0
- Outcome
- Shorter and more compact plantse0
- Direction
- Shortere0
- Comparator
- red + far red (R + FR)e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“blue + far red (B + FR) acted quite differently from the combination red + far red (R + FR) and caused a general inhibition of growth phenomena. Shorter and more compact plants were produced under B + FR tunnels”
t0“peach plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Blue plus far red light reduced shoot elongation and internode length.
- Taxon
- peach plantsPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- B + FRe0
- Outcome
- shoot elongatione0
- Direction
- reductione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“under B + FR tunnels where the reduction in shoot elongation was consistent with the reduction in internode length”
t0“peach plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Blue plus far red light reduced branching relative to other light treatments.
- Taxon
- peach plantsPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- B + FR filtere0
- Outcome
- branchinge0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- the other light treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“light transmitted through the B + FR filter resulted in lower branching and in smaller and thinner leaves compared with those grown under the other light treatments”
t0“peach plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Blue plus far red light produced smaller and thinner leaves than other light treatments.
- Taxon
- peach plantsPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- B + FR filtere0
- Outcome
- smaller and thinner leavese0
- Direction
- smaller and thinnere0
- Comparator
- the other light treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“light transmitted through the B + FR filter resulted in lower branching and in smaller and thinner leaves compared with those grown under the other light treatments”
t0“peach plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Light quality and quantity did not affect flower number.
- Taxon
- peach plantsPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- light quality or quantitye0
- Outcome
- number of flowerse0
- Direction
- not affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The number of flowers was not affected by either light quality or quantity”
t0“peach plants”
Claim · model-written summary
The negative growth response under blue plus far red light was associated with low Pfr and blue light.
- Taxon
- peach plantsPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- B + FRe0
- Gene
- Pfre0
- Outcome
- negative effect on growth and developmente0
- Qualifier
- low Pfre0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The negative effect on growth and development of the light environment under B + FR was associated with low Pfr (far red light absorbing form of phytochrome) and with the action of blue light”
t0“peach plants”
The same questions in other papers
light · yield · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
7 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →shade · growth · Prunus persica (peach)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- negative
- 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.