Abstract
A set of 3 experiments was conducted to determine if cellulose fibers (CF) could reduce the incidence of sunburn injury in `Paulared' apples. Sunburn injury was artificially increased in these experiments by fruit manipulation and removal of shading vegetative growth to expose apples to at least 4 hours of direct sunlight. The 4 treatments applied included an unsprayed control, a commercial binding agent (CBA), a 1% corn starch (CS) colloidal suspension, and a 3% CF suspension that contains CBA and CS. No differences between treatments were found in the first experiment. The CF suspension concentration was increased to 9% for the second experiment. This resulted in uneven CF distribution on the fruit surface and no significant differences between treatments. The third experiment was designed to more precisely determine sunburn symptom expression by delineating the manipulated fruit surface area directly exposed to sunlight prior to treatment. The resulting percent of area that showed a white (bleached) sunburn symptom was significantly less for the apple fruit treated with CF than CBA alone.
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 4
Claim · model-written summary
In the first experiment no differences between treatments were found for sunburn injury.
- Taxon
- apples
Malus domesticae2 - Treatment
- treatmentse1
- Outcome
- sunburn injurye2
- Direction
- No differencese1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“No differences between treatments were found in the first experiment”
e2“A set of 3 experiments was conducted to determine if cellulose fibers (CF) could reduce the incidence of sunburn injury in `Paulared' apples”
Claim · model-written summary
In the second experiment, the 9% CF suspension gave no significant differences between treatments.
- Taxon
- applesMalus domesticae2
- Treatment
- CF suspensione4
- Outcome
- sunburn injurye2
- Direction
- no significant differencese3
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“A set of 3 experiments was conducted to determine if cellulose fibers (CF) could reduce the incidence of sunburn injury in `Paulared' apples”
e3“This resulted in uneven CF distribution on the fruit surface and no significant differences between treatments”
e4“The CF suspension concentration was increased to 9% for the second experiment”
Claim · model-written summary
The 9% CF suspension produced uneven CF distribution on the fruit surface.
- Taxon
- applesMalus domesticae2
- Outcome
- uneven CF distribution on the fruit surfacee3
- Qualifier
- unevene3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“A set of 3 experiments was conducted to determine if cellulose fibers (CF) could reduce the incidence of sunburn injury in `Paulared' apples”
e3“This resulted in uneven CF distribution on the fruit surface and no significant differences between treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Cellulose fiber suspension gave a significantly smaller area of white sunburn symptom on apple fruit than binding agent alone.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae5
- Treatment
- CFe5
- Outcome
- percent of area that showed a white (bleached) sunburn symptome5
- Direction
- lesse5
- Comparator
- CBA alonee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“The resulting percent of area that showed a white (bleached) sunburn symptom was significantly less for the apple fruit treated with CF than CBA alone”
The same questions in other papers
(1->4)-beta-D-glucan · disease · Malus domestica (apple)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.