Abstract
The effect of fertigation on the mineral composition of apple fruits, their quality (colour, firmness, soluble solids) and storability was investigated from 1992 untill 1994 at the Research Station Bavendorf. In the first experiment with cultivars 'Elstar'/M9 and 'Boskoop'/M9 (2000 trees/ha) three fertigation treatments (two nitrogen levels and a calcium nitrate application) were compared to control (broadcast fertilization) and to irrigated trees (drip irrigation + broadcast fertilization). In the second experiment the influence of fertigation on quality parameters was investigated in relation to planting density (3330 and 6000 trees/ha with 'Jonica', 2000 trees/ha with 'Elstar'), crop density and fruit size at the cultivars 'Jonica'/M9 and 'Elstar'/M9. No significant differences were found in firmness, acidity, sugar content and their changes after storage between fruits from fertigated and non-fertigated plots. Fertigation did not improve the mineral content of the fruits in respect to their storability (Ca content, K/Ca-ratio). When the nitrogen level applied by fertigation was reduced this do not affect the skin colour. A calcium nitrate application did neither increase Ca in the fruits nor decrease the K/Ca-ratio. One reason for the homogenous fruit quality may be the applied size-selective thinning method. It was not possible to avoid alternate bearing by fertigation. No positive effect of fertigation on flowering and productivity of apple trees (annual and cumulative yields) was observed. Trees with drip irrigation and broadcast fertilization achieved the maximum yield of dessert fruits. A comparison of different factors showed that fruit quality was mostly affected by the number of fruits per tree. At low crop density firmness and content of soluble solids were higher and therefore the apples tasted better than at high fruit density. However storability decreased as a result of lowered Ca-levels in the fruit and higher K/Ca-ratios. Firmness and storability also decreased with increasing fruit size. These negative quality parameters both at low crop density and large fruit size could not be improved by fertigation.
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 14
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigated and non-fertigated apple fruits showed no significant difference in firmness, acidity and sugar content, or in their changes after storage.
- Taxon
- apple trees
Malus domesticat1 - Organ / stage
- fruitse1
- Treatment
- fertigatede1
- Outcome
- firmness, acidity, sugar contente1
- Direction
- No significant differences were founde1
- Qualifier
- changes after storagee1
- Comparator
- non-fertigated plotse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“No significant differences were found in firmness, acidity, sugar content and their changes after storage between fruits from fertigated and non-fertigated plots”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigation did not improve the mineral content of apple fruits in respect to storability (Ca content, K/Ca ratio).
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Organ / stage
- fruitse2
- Treatment
- Fertigatione2
- Outcome
- mineral content of the fruitse2
- Direction
- did not improvee2
- Qualifier
- Ca content, K/Ca-ratioe2
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“Fertigation did not improve the mineral content of the fruits in respect to their storability (Ca content, K/Ca-ratio)”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Reducing the nitrogen level applied by fertigation did not affect apple skin colour.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Organ / stage
- skine3
- Treatment
- nitrogen level applied by fertigatione3
- Outcome
- skin coloure3
- Direction
- do not affecte3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e3“When the nitrogen level applied by fertigation was reduced this do not affect the skin colour”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
A calcium nitrate application did not increase Ca in apple fruits.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Organ / stage
- fruitse4
- Treatment
- calcium nitrate applicatione4
- Outcome
- Ca in the fruitse4
- Direction
- did neither increasee4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“A calcium nitrate application did neither increase Ca in the fruits nor decrease the K/Ca-ratio”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
A calcium nitrate application did not decrease the K/Ca ratio of apple fruits.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- calcium nitrate applicatione4
- Outcome
- K/Ca-ratioe4
- Direction
- nor decreasee4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e4“A calcium nitrate application did neither increase Ca in the fruits nor decrease the K/Ca-ratio”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigation could not avoid alternate bearing in apple trees.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- fertigatione5
- Outcome
- alternate bearinge5
- Direction
- not possible to avoide5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“It was not possible to avoid alternate bearing by fertigation”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigation had no positive effect on flowering and productivity (annual and cumulative yields) of apple trees.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- fertigatione6
- Outcome
- flowering and productivitye6
- Direction
- No positive effecte6
- Qualifier
- annual and cumulative yieldse6
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e6“No positive effect of fertigation on flowering and productivity of apple trees (annual and cumulative yields) was observed”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Trees with drip irrigation and broadcast fertilization achieved the maximum yield of dessert fruits.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- drip irrigation and broadcast fertilizatione7
- Outcome
- yield of dessert fruitse7
- Direction
- achieved the maximume7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e7“Trees with drip irrigation and broadcast fertilization achieved the maximum yield of dessert fruits”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit quality of apple trees was mostly affected by the number of fruits per tree.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- number of fruits per treee0
- Outcome
- fruit qualitye0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“fruit quality was mostly affected by the number of fruits per tree”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
At low crop density, apple firmness and soluble solids content were higher than at high fruit density.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- low crop densitye0
- Outcome
- firmness and content of soluble solidse0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- high fruit densitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At low crop density firmness and content of soluble solids were higher and therefore the apples tasted better than at high fruit density”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
At low crop density, apples tasted better than at high fruit density.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- low crop densitye0
- Outcome
- apples tastede0
- Direction
- bettere0
- Comparator
- high fruit densitye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“At low crop density firmness and content of soluble solids were higher and therefore the apples tasted better than at high fruit density”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Storability of apples decreased with lowered fruit Ca-levels and higher K/Ca ratios.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Compound
- Ca-levelse0
- Outcome
- storabilitye0
- Direction
- decreasede0
- Qualifier
- higher K/Ca-ratiose0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“However storability decreased as a result of lowered Ca-levels in the fruit and higher K/Ca-ratios”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Firmness and storability of apples decreased with increasing fruit size.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- increasing fruit sizee0
- Outcome
- firmness and storabilitye0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Firmness and storability also decreased with increasing fruit size”
t1“APPLE TREES”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertigation could not improve the negative quality parameters at low crop density and large fruit size.
- Taxon
- apple treesMalus domesticat1
- Treatment
- fertigatione0
- Outcome
- negative quality parameterse0
- Direction
- could not be improvede0
- Qualifier
- at low crop density and large fruit sizee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“These negative quality parameters both at low crop density and large fruit size could not be improved by fertigation”
t1“APPLE TREES”
The same questions in other papers
calcium nitrate · nutrient: content · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →transplanting · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
nitrogen · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
18 papers more in this group
See all 22 papers →fertilization · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 18 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
22 papers more in this group
See all 26 papers →fertilization · quality: general · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 22 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →irrigation · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 17 in the opposite direction · 4 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- no effect
- negative
80 papers more in this group
See all 84 papers →fertilization · nutrient: content · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
30 papers in the same direction as this paper · 86 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
113 papers more in this group
See all 117 papers →fertilization · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
149 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
174 papers more in this group
See all 178 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.