Abstract
SummaryIn Junebearing strawberry cultivars, flowering is induced by short photoperiod, which also reduces vegetative growth. The loss in vigour can lower yield if plants are not cold treated to restore vegetative growth. The aim of this study was to find a photoperiod treatment that induces flowering but does not reduce vegetative growth in strawberry ‘Korona’. Plants were subjected to different photoperiods (12, 13.5 or 15.h) for varying durations (21, 35 or 49.d). After treatments, effects on plant development were recorded during forcing at 18 h daylength. Floral induction was comparably successful in 12 and 13.5.h photoperiods and the number of flowers and yield were increased by lengthening the treatment. Induction failed in many plants treated in a 15.h photoperiod and flowering was poor regardless of duration of treatment. Shorter photoperiod increased the number of branch crowns and reduced runner production, and these effects were enhanced by lengthening the treatment duration. Reduction in vegetative growth measured by petiole length was most obvious in 12.h photoperiod in all treatment durations, although the differences between treatments rapidly disappeared during forcing. Twelve and 13.5.h photoperiods were equally efficient in producing yield, but more vigorous vegetative growth was maintained during treatment in a 13.5.h photoperiod.
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
Floral induction was similarly successful at 12 and 13.5 hours.
- Taxon
- strawberry
_single2.jpg?width=60)
Fragaria ×ananassat0 - Treatment
- 12e0
- Outcome
- Floral inductione0
- Direction
- comparably successfule0
- Comparator
- 13.5.h photoperiodse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_single2.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“Floral induction was comparably successful in 12 and 13.5.h photoperiods”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Longer short-day treatment increased flower number.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- lengthening the treatmente0
- Outcome
- number of flowerse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the number of flowers and yield were increased by lengthening the treatment.”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Longer short-day treatment increased yield.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- lengthening the treatmente0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the number of flowers and yield were increased by lengthening the treatment.”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
At 15 hours, induction failed in many plants and flowering remained poor regardless of treatment duration.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- 15.h photoperiode0
- Outcome
- Induction failed in many plantse0
- Qualifier
- regardless of duration of treatmente0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Induction failed in many plants treated in a 15.h photoperiod and flowering was poor regardless of duration of treatment.”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
At 15 hours, flowering remained poor regardless of treatment duration.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- 15.h photoperiode0
- Outcome
- floweringe0
- Direction
- poore0
- Qualifier
- regardless of duration of treatmente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Induction failed in many plants treated in a 15.h photoperiod and flowering was poor regardless of duration of treatment.”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Shorter photoperiod increased branch-crown number, amplified by longer treatment.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- Shorter photoperiode0
- Outcome
- number of branch crownse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- enhanced by lengthening the treatment duratione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shorter photoperiod increased the number of branch crowns and reduced runner production, and these effects were enhanced by lengthening the treatment duration.”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Shorter photoperiod reduced runner production, amplified by longer treatment.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- Shorter photoperiode0
- Outcome
- runner productione0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- enhanced by lengthening the treatment duratione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Shorter photoperiod increased the number of branch crowns and reduced runner production, and these effects were enhanced by lengthening the treatment duration.”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Petiole length showed the clearest vegetative-growth reduction at 12 hours for every duration.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- 12.h photoperiode0
- Outcome
- petiole lengthe0
- Direction
- Reductione0
- Qualifier
- all treatment durationse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Reduction in vegetative growth measured by petiole length was most obvious in 12.h photoperiod in all treatment durations”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Petiole-length differences among photoperiod treatments rapidly disappeared during forcing.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Outcome
- differences between treatmentse0
- Direction
- disappearede0
- Qualifier
- during forcinge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the differences between treatments rapidly disappeared during forcing.”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Twelve- and 13.5-hour photoperiods produced yield equally efficiently.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- Twelvee0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- equally efficiente0
- Comparator
- 13.5.h photoperiodse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Twelve and 13.5.h photoperiods were equally efficient in producing yield”
t0“strawberry”
Claim · model-written summary
The 13.5-hour photoperiod maintained more vigorous vegetative growth during treatment.
- Taxon
- strawberryFragaria ×ananassat0
- Treatment
- 13.5.h photoperiode0
- Outcome
- vegetative growthe0
- Direction
- more vigorouse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“more vigorous vegetative growth was maintained during treatment in a 13.5.h photoperiod.”
t0“strawberry”
The same questions in other papers
light · phenology · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Results differ
12 papers in the same direction as this paper · 21 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →light · molecular: metabolites · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results
18 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
19 papers more in this group
See all 23 papers →light · growth · Fragaria x ananassa (strawberry)Positive and negative results
53 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
64 papers more in this group
See all 68 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.