Paper · 2019 · POMICULTURE & SMALL FRUITS CULTURE IN RUSSIA

INFLUENCE OF SUCCINIC AND CITRIC ACIDS ON THE GRAPE MORPHOPHYSIOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT AT THE PLANT REARING STAGE AFTER MICROPROPAGATION

T. A. Krasinskaya; I. N. Ostapchuk

6
claims
12
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Research aim was to study the influence of foliar treatment with 0.2% succinic (SA) and citric acids (CA) on the morphological and biochemical parameters of the grape plant development at the plant rearing stage. A plant-specific response to biologic active substances was observed: the stem length of Marquette variety was higher after pretreatment of SA (29.1 cm), in CA pretreatment significantly inhibited the growth of the stem (8.8 cm) of Bianca variety compared to SA pretreatment (10.5 cm) and control (14.6 cm). SA and CA pretreatments had a significant effect on the accumulation of monosaccharides, sucrose and chlorophylls b. The influence of CA was to inhibit the growth of the stem and to activate the accumulation of phenolic compounds as compared to the control and SA. The effect of biologically active substances was prolonged, persisting for 24 weeks of research.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Succinic acid pretreatment raised Marquette stem length to 29.1 cm.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Material
Marquettee0
Treatment
pretreatment of SAe0
Outcome
stem lengthe0
Direction
highere0
Value
29.1 cme0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“the stem length of Marquette variety was higher after pretreatment of SA (29.1 cm)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 283–365 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–51 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Citric acid pretreatment inhibited Bianca stem growth relative to SA and control.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Material
Biancae0
Treatment
CA pretreatmente0
Outcome
growth of the steme0
Direction
inhibitede0
Value
8.8 cme0
Qualifier
control (14.6 cm)e0
Comparator
SA pretreatmente0

Verbatim

e0

“in CA pretreatment significantly inhibited the growth of the stem (8.8 cm) of Bianca variety compared to SA pretreatment (10.5 cm) and control (14.6 cm).”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 367–520 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–51 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

SA and CA pretreatments significantly affected monosaccharide, sucrose and chlorophyll b accumulation.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
SA and CA pretreatmentse0
Outcome
accumulation of monosaccharides, sucrose and chlorophylls be0

Not reportedComparatorDirection

Verbatim

e0

“SA and CA pretreatments had a significant effect on the accumulation of monosaccharides, sucrose and chlorophylls b.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 521–637 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–51 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

CA inhibited stem growth compared with control and SA.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
growth of the steme0
Direction
inhibite0
Comparator
the control and SAe0

Verbatim

e0

“The influence of CA was to inhibit the growth of the stem and to activate the accumulation of phenolic compounds as compared to the control and SA.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 638–785 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–51 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

CA activated phenolic-compound accumulation compared with control and SA.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
CAe0
Outcome
accumulation of phenolic compoundse0
Direction
activatee0
Comparator
the control and SAe0

Verbatim

e0

“The influence of CA was to inhibit the growth of the stem and to activate the accumulation of phenolic compounds as compared to the control and SA.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 638–785 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–51 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Effects of biologically active substances persisted for 24 weeks.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Outcome
effect of biologically active substancese0
Direction
prolongede0
Value
24 weekse0

Verbatim

e0

“The effect of biologically active substances was prolonged, persisting for 24 weeks of research.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–882 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 46–51 · show in text ↑

salicylic acid · growth · VitisResults differ

11 papers: 8 positive, 3 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. negative

7 papers more in this group

See all 11 papers →

citric acid · growth · VitisPositive and negative results

2 papers: 1 positive, 1 negative or no effect

1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
See all 2 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.