Paper · 1992 · HortScience

INVESTIGATING CULTIVAR DIFFERENCES IN STRESS-INDUCED ABSCISSION IN BELL PEPPER (CAPSICUM ANNUM L.) WITH GROWTH ANALYSIS

A.D. Turner; H.C. Wien

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Cultivars of bell pepper differ in susceptibility to bud/flower abscission. Reduction in the level of assimilate, and alterations in assimilate partitioning may be involved in the processes leading to bud/flower abscission. Four growth analysis experiments were conducted to determine whether two pepper cultivars differing in susceptibility to stress-induced abscission showed corresponding differences in growth and rates and dry matter partitioning when subjected to shade stress. The reduction in RGR and NAR with shading was significantly greater for the abscission-susceptible `Shamrock' than the more tolerant `Ace'. Partitioning of dry matter to reproductive structures was reduced by shading. There were no cultivar differences in the proportion of dry matter partitioned to young developing leaves. Fully expanded leaves comprised a larger proportion of total dry matter in `Shamrock'. The lower NAR of `Shamrock' under stress may have led to greater bud/flower abscission than `Ace' under shade stress. If preferential partitioning of dry matter to competing structures (developing leaves) is also involved, it was not detected using this technique.

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 7

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Shade reduced RGR more in Shamrock than Ace.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Material
`Shamrock'e0
Treatment
shadinge0
Outcome
RGRe0
Direction
reductione0
Comparator
`Ace'e0

Verbatim

e0

“The reduction in RGR and NAR with shading was significantly greater for the abscission-susceptible `Shamrock' than the more tolerant `Ace'.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 484–623 · show in text ↑
t0

“BELL PEPPER”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–78 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Shade reduced NAR more in Shamrock than Ace.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Material
`Shamrock'e0
Treatment
shadinge0
Outcome
NARe0
Direction
reductione0
Comparator
`Ace'e0

Verbatim

e0

“The reduction in RGR and NAR with shading was significantly greater for the abscission-susceptible `Shamrock' than the more tolerant `Ace'.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 484–623 · show in text ↑
t0

“BELL PEPPER”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–78 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Shading reduced dry matter partitioning to reproductive structures.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Organ / stage
reproductive structurese0
Treatment
shadinge0
Outcome
Partitioning of dry matter to reproductive structurese0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Partitioning of dry matter to reproductive structures was reduced by shading.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 624–701 · show in text ↑
t0

“BELL PEPPER”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–78 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cultivars did not differ in the fraction of dry matter partitioned to young developing leaves.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Organ / stage
young developing leavese0
Outcome
proportion of dry matter partitioned to young developing leavese0
Direction
no cultivar differencese0

Verbatim

e0

“There were no cultivar differences in the proportion of dry matter partitioned to young developing leaves.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 702–808 · show in text ↑
t0

“BELL PEPPER”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–78 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fully expanded leaves comprised a larger dry matter fraction in Shamrock.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Material
`Shamrock'e0
Organ / stage
Fully expanded leavese0
Outcome
proportion of total dry mattere0
Direction
largere0

Verbatim

e0

“Fully expanded leaves comprised a larger proportion of total dry matter in `Shamrock'.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 809–895 · show in text ↑
t0

“BELL PEPPER”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–78 · show in text ↑
Mechanismauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Lower NAR under stress may explain greater bud and flower abscission in Shamrock than Ace.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Material
`Shamrock'e0
Outcome
bud/flower abscissione0
Direction
greatere0
Qualifier
lower NARe0
Comparator
`Ace'e0

Verbatim

e0

“The lower NAR of `Shamrock' under stress may have led to greater bud/flower abscission than `Ace' under shade stress.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 896–1013 · show in text ↑
t0

“BELL PEPPER”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–78 · show in text ↑
Method / resourceauthor interpretationoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The growth-analysis technique did not detect preferential dry matter partitioning to developing leaves.

Taxon
bell peppert0
Outcome
preferential partitioning of dry matter to competing structurese0
Direction
not detectede0
Qualifier
using this techniquee0

Not reportedComparatorValue

Verbatim

e0

“If preferential partitioning of dry matter to competing structures (developing leaves) is also involved, it was not detected using this technique.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1014–1160 · show in text ↑
t0

“BELL PEPPER”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 67–78 · show in text ↑

shade · growth · Capsicum annuum (sweet pepper)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 13 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 13 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 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.