Paper · 2017 · Comunicata Scientiae

Degrane de bagas e escurecimento da ráquis em uva de mesa

Maria Aparecida Rodrigues Ferreira; Rita De Cássia Mirela Resende Nassur; Leandro José Oliveira de Von Hausen; et al.

2
claims
8
verbatim quotes
1
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Most of the postharvest losses on table grapes are related to the berry abscission and stem browning that affect the product appearance, reducing its commercial value and becoming a problem to table grapes production chain worldwide. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of pre-harvest application of foliar fertilizers, plant growth regulators or a mix of both on table grapes var. ‘Sweet Globe’ quality parameters. All treatments were applied in a volume of 100 L ha-1 after 75 days (pre-softening), 95 days (ten days before harvest) and 103 days (two days before harvest). The clusters were harvested at the commercial harvest maturity stage, packed and stored in a cold room (0 °C and 95% RH), being evaluated for berry abscission, stem browning, firmness, abscission force, soluble solids, acidity, stem dry matter, stem water activity and weight loss at harvest and at 14, 42 and 56 days of storage. Although there was no statistical difference from control, the pre-harvest application of Hold® + Gibberellin resulted in clusters with lower percentage of berry abscission and the application of Kamab® resulted in clusters with lower stem browning, both evaluated after 56 days of storage.

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 2

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-harvest application of Hold plus gibberellin lowered berry abscission in table grapes after 56 days of storage, without significant difference from control.

Taxon
table grapese0
Treatment
pre-harvest application of Hold® + Gibberelline2
Outcome
percentage of berry abscissione2
Direction
lowere2
Qualifier
after 56 days of storagee4
Comparator
controle1

Verbatim

e0

“Most of the postharvest losses on table grapes are related to the berry abscission and stem browning”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–100 · show in text ↑
e1

“Although there was no statistical difference from control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 918–975 · show in text ↑
e2

“the pre-harvest application of Hold® + Gibberellin resulted in clusters with lower percentage of berry abscission”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 977–1090 · show in text ↑
e4

“both evaluated after 56 days of storage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1168–1207 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Pre-harvest application of Kamab lowered stem browning in table grapes after 56 days of storage, without significant difference from control.

Taxon
table grapese0
Treatment
application of Kamab®e3
Outcome
stem browninge3
Direction
lowere3
Qualifier
after 56 days of storagee4
Comparator
controle1

Verbatim

e0

“Most of the postharvest losses on table grapes are related to the berry abscission and stem browning”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–100 · show in text ↑
e1

“Although there was no statistical difference from control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 918–975 · show in text ↑
e3

“the application of Kamab® resulted in clusters with lower stem browning”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1095–1166 · show in text ↑
e4

“both evaluated after 56 days of storage”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1168–1207 · show in text ↑

class · yield · VitisPositive and negative results

13 papers: 10 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

9 papers more in this group

See all 13 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.