Abstract
This study looked at alternatives to chemicals for replant disease in peach, which has not had an effective management solution since the loss of methyl bromide. A factorial experiment was initiated in 2010 at the Western Colorado Research Center, CO with soil solarization vs. no soil solarization as main treatments; chicken manure plus compost, chicken manure, mustard (Brassica juncea), mustard meal cake, and a control as sub-treatments and ‘Nemaguard’, ‘Lovell’, ‘St. Julian’ and ‘Viking’ rootstocks as sub-sub treatments with 6 replications. The tree growth on the above rootstocks was also compared with trench and compost as well as in non-replant site in different experiments. Trees were planted in May the following year of treatments and tree circumferences were measured within a month of planting, and tree survival taken annually. Results indicated that soil solarization had no impact on first year growth, second year, and cumulative growth. Soil amendments and rootstock had a significant effect on first year, second year and cumulative tree growth. ‘Viking’ was the best rootstock in terms of tree growth irrespective of treatments and for tree survival in some treatments. Tree mortality, observed in some treatment combinations such as in soil solarization combined with mustard, was not found in the mustard and chicken manure plots, nor with ‘Nemaguard’ rootstock except in the soil solarization combined with chicken manure plots. Tree growth on ‘Nemaguard’ rootstock was second to ‘Viking’. The least tree growth and lowest tree mortality was observed on ‘St. Julian’ rootstock. Cytospora canker was associated with higher tree death after the first year. Trenching increased tree growth which varied with compost and rootstock combination.
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
Soil solarization had no impact on first-year, second-year, or cumulative peach growth.
- Taxon
- PEACH
Prunus persicat0 - Treatment
- soil solarizatione0
- Outcome
- first year growth, second year, and cumulative growthe0
- Direction
- no impacte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“soil solarization had no impact on first year growth, second year, and cumulative growth”
Claim · model-written summary
Soil amendments significantly affected first-year, second-year, and cumulative peach growth.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- Soil amendmentse0
- Outcome
- first year, second year and cumulative tree growthe0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“Soil amendments and rootstock had a significant effect on first year, second year and cumulative tree growth”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock significantly affected first-year, second-year, and cumulative peach growth.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Material
- rootstocke0
- Outcome
- first year, second year and cumulative tree growthe0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“Soil amendments and rootstock had a significant effect on first year, second year and cumulative tree growth”
Claim · model-written summary
Viking gave the best peach tree growth irrespective of treatment.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Material
- ‘Viking’e0
- Outcome
- tree growthe0
- Direction
- beste0
- Qualifier
- irrespective of treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“‘Viking’ was the best rootstock in terms of tree growth irrespective of treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Viking gave the best peach tree survival in some treatments.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Material
- ‘Viking’e0
- Outcome
- tree survivale0
- Direction
- beste0
- Qualifier
- some treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“‘Viking’ was the best rootstock in terms of tree growth irrespective of treatments and for tree survival in some treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Tree mortality occurred with solarization combined with mustard.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- soil solarization combined with mustarde0
- Outcome
- Tree mortalitye0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“Tree mortality, observed in some treatment combinations such as in soil solarization combined with mustard”
Claim · model-written summary
Tree mortality was absent in mustard and chicken manure plots.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- mustard and chicken manuree0
- Outcome
- was not founde0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“was not found in the mustard and chicken manure plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Tree mortality was absent with Nemaguard except in solarization combined with chicken manure plots.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Material
- ‘Nemaguard’e0
- Outcome
- nor withe0
- Qualifier
- except in the soil solarization combined with chicken manure plotse0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“nor with ‘Nemaguard’ rootstock except in the soil solarization combined with chicken manure plots”
Claim · model-written summary
Nemaguard was second to Viking for peach tree growth.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Material
- ‘Nemaguard’e0
- Outcome
- Tree growthe0
- Direction
- seconde0
- Comparator
- ‘Viking’e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“Tree growth on ‘Nemaguard’ rootstock was second to ‘Viking’”
Claim · model-written summary
St. Julian had the least peach tree growth.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Material
- ‘St. Julian’e0
- Outcome
- tree growthe0
- Direction
- leaste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“The least tree growth and lowest tree mortality was observed on ‘St. Julian’ rootstock”
Claim · model-written summary
St. Julian had the lowest peach tree mortality.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Material
- ‘St. Julian’e0
- Outcome
- tree mortalitye0
- Direction
- loweste0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“The least tree growth and lowest tree mortality was observed on ‘St. Julian’ rootstock”
Claim · model-written summary
Cytospora canker was associated with higher tree death after the first year.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Outcome
- tree deathe0
- Direction
- highere0
- Qualifier
- after the first yeare0
CytosporaOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“Cytospora canker was associated with higher tree death after the first year”
Claim · model-written summary
Trenching increased peach tree growth, varying with compost and rootstock combination.
- Taxon
- PEACHPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- Trenchinge0
- Outcome
- tree growthe0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- compost and rootstock combinatione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“PEACH REPLANT DISEASE”
e0“Trenching increased tree growth which varied with compost and rootstock combination”
The same questions in other papers
solarization · growth · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
5 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 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.