Paper · 1992 · HortScience

ALTERNATIVE ORCHARD GROUNDCOVER MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS AFFECT APPLE QUALITY AND MATURITY INDICES

L A. Merwin; G.D. Blanpied

8
claims
16
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Alternative groundcover management systems (GMS) beneath establishing 'Jonagold' apple trees have been evaluated since 1986 in an orchard field test Tree-row GMS being studied include post-emergence herbicide (glyphosate) “killed sods”, pre-emergence herbicides (norflurazon and diuron). a crownvetch “living mulch”, hay-straw mulch, monthly cultivation, and a closely mowed sodgrass. Trees in herbicide and straw-mulch plots produced the most fruit in 1990, but in 1991 there were no GMS-related differences in crop load. Fruit were larger in herbicide and straw-mulch plots in 1990 and 1991, and red color development was better in sod and crownvetch GMS. Starch-to-sugar conversion was advanced in apples from sodgrass and straw mulched plots. The ethylene climacteric was delayed in fruit from crownvetch and straw-mulch GMS, and peaked rapidly as mean starch indices approached 4.0 in all GMS treatments. Differences in soil moisture and nutrient availability under alternative GMS may have influenced fruit quality and maturity.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide and straw mulch plots produced the most apple fruit in 1990.

Treatment
herbicide and straw-mulche0
Outcome
fruite0
Direction
moste0
Qualifier
1990e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Trees in herbicide and straw-mulch plots produced the most fruit in 1990”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 385–457 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Groundcover systems had no crop load differences in 1991.

Outcome
crop loade0
Direction
no GMS-related differencese0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“in 1991 there were no GMS-related differences in crop load”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 463–521 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Herbicide and straw mulch plots had larger fruit in 1990 and 1991.

Treatment
herbicide and straw-mulche0
Outcome
Fruite0
Direction
largere0
Qualifier
1990 and 1991e0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Fruit were larger in herbicide and straw-mulch plots in 1990 and 1991”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 523–592 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Red color developed better under sod and crownvetch groundcovers.

Treatment
sod and crownvetch GMSe0
Outcome
red color developmente0
Direction
bettere0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“red color development was better in sod and crownvetch GMS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 598–656 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Starch-to-sugar conversion advanced under sodgrass and straw mulch.

Treatment
sodgrass and straw mulched plotse0
Outcome
Starch-to-sugar conversione0
Direction
advancede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Starch-to-sugar conversion was advanced in apples from sodgrass and straw mulched plots”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 658–745 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The ethylene climacteric was delayed under crownvetch and straw mulch.

Treatment
crownvetch and straw-mulch GMSe0
Outcome
ethylene climacterice0
Direction
delayede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The ethylene climacteric was delayed in fruit from crownvetch and straw-mulch GMS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 747–828 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The ethylene climacteric peaked rapidly as mean starch indices approached 4.0 across all systems.

Treatment
all GMS treatmentse0
Outcome
peaked rapidlye0
Direction
peaked rapidlye0
Qualifier
mean starch indices approached 4.0e0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“peaked rapidly as mean starch indices approached 4.0 in all GMS treatments”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 834–908 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑
Mechanismhypothesisoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil moisture and nutrient availability may have influenced apple fruit quality and maturity.

Outcome
fruit quality and maturitye0
Qualifier
Differences in soil moisture and nutrient availabilitye0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Differences in soil moisture and nutrient availability under alternative GMS may have influenced fruit quality and maturity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 910–1033 · show in text ↑
t0

“APPLE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 58–63 · show in text ↑

cultivation system · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

herbicide · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 17 positive, 4 negative or no effect

16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. negative
  3. no effect

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

organic · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree

11 papers: 11 positive, 0 negative or no effect

10 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 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.