Abstract
The purpose of this research project was to determine how mulching, specific harvesting times, and the differing weather conditions of the years involved affected the biochemical content of two Rubus family species: the raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) ‘Tomo’ and the blackberry (Rubus fruticosus coll.) ‘Agawam’. The appropriate data were recorded in the course of the years 2001–2004. The ‘Tomo’ and ‘Agawam’ fruit weight was not significantly influenced by cultivation technology, but was influenced by harvesting time and the weather conditions of the particular year involved. The fruit dry matter (DM) was directly related to the berries’ harvesting time. The soluble solids content (SSC) in the raspberry fruits was 9.9–13.3 % and 8.9–16.0 % in the blackberries. The raspberry fruits’ SSC was significantly influenced by cultivation technology: the SSC was higher in berries grown without mulch. The ascorbic acid content (AAC) varied over the years, and depended mostly on the particular species. The raspberry fruits’ AAC was significantly influenced by cultivation technology: the AAC was higher in berries grown without mulch. The blackberry fruits’ AAC was also influenced by the harvesting time, being higher in berries from the last harvesting. The differing yearly wheather conditions had a greater effect on the blackberry fruits’ titratable acids (TA) content. The results indicated that fruit weight and biochemical content were primarily influenced by the differing weather conditions of the various years involved. The berries, for instance, contained more DM and soluble solids, and less TA in 2002. Cultivation technology had significant influence only on the raspberry fruits’ AAC and SSC. Harvesting time had an impact on both the raspberry and the blackberry fruit weight and DM content, but the fruit SSC, AAC, and TA were affected only in the blackberry.
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
Cultivation technology did not significantly influence fruit weight in either cultivar.
Verbatim
e0“the raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) ‘Tomo’ and the blackberry (Rubus fruticosus coll.) ‘Agawam’”
e1“The ‘Tomo’ and ‘Agawam’ fruit weight was not significantly influenced by cultivation technology”
Claim · model-written summary
Harvesting time and yearly weather influenced fruit weight.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) ‘Tomo’ and the blackberry (Rubus fruticosus coll.) ‘Agawam’”
e1“but was influenced by harvesting time and the weather conditions of the particular year involved”
e2“The ‘Tomo’ and ‘Agawam’ fruit weight was not significantly influenced by cultivation technology”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit dry matter was directly related to harvesting time.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) ‘Tomo’ and the blackberry (Rubus fruticosus coll.) ‘Agawam’”
e1“The fruit dry matter (DM) was directly related to the berries’ harvesting time.”
Claim · model-written summary
Raspberry soluble solids content ranged from 9.9 to 13.3%.
Verbatim
e0“The soluble solids content (SSC) in the raspberry fruits was 9.9–13.3 %”
Claim · model-written summary
Blackberry soluble solids content ranged from 8.9 to 16.0%.
RubusOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“8.9–16.0 % in the blackberries”
e1“The soluble solids content (SSC)”
Claim · model-written summary
Raspberry soluble solids content was significantly higher without mulch.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“raspberry fruits’ SSC was significantly influenced by cultivation technology: the SSC was higher in berries grown without mulch”
Claim · model-written summary
Ascorbic acid content varied by year and mostly by species.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) ‘Tomo’ and the blackberry (Rubus fruticosus coll.) ‘Agawam’”
e1“The ascorbic acid content (AAC) varied over the years, and depended mostly on the particular species.”
Claim · model-written summary
Raspberry ascorbic acid content was significantly higher without mulch.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The raspberry fruits’ AAC was significantly influenced by cultivation technology: the AAC was higher in berries grown without mulch.”
Claim · model-written summary
Blackberry ascorbic acid content was higher at the last harvest.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The blackberry fruits’ AAC was also influenced by the harvesting time, being higher in berries from the last harvesting.”
Claim · model-written summary
Yearly weather had a greater effect on blackberry titratable acids.
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The differing yearly wheather conditions had a greater effect on the blackberry fruits’ titratable acids (TA) content.”
Claim · model-written summary
Berries had more dry matter and soluble solids in 2002.
Verbatim
e0“The berries, for instance, contained more DM and soluble solids, and less TA in 2002.”
Claim · model-written summary
Berries had less titratable acid in 2002.
Verbatim
e0“The berries, for instance, contained more DM and soluble solids, and less TA in 2002.”
Claim · model-written summary
Yearly weather was the primary influence on fruit weight and biochemical content.
- Taxon
- raspberrye0
- Outcome
- fruit weight and biochemical contente1
- Setting
- differing weather conditions of the various years involvede1
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“the raspberry (Rubus idaeus L.) ‘Tomo’ and the blackberry (Rubus fruticosus coll.) ‘Agawam’”
e1“fruit weight and biochemical content were primarily influenced by the differing weather conditions of the various years involved”
The same questions in other papers
mulching · quality: phytochemicals · Rubus idaeus (red raspberry)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
mulching · molecular: metabolites · Rubus idaeus (red raspberry)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.