Abstract
The aim of the study is to assess the yield, fruit quality, phenolic compounds, and organic acids of the Granny Smith Challenger apple (Malus × domestica Borkh.) grown under protective shade nets. In the study, control (unnetted, T1), shade nets with 15% weave (T2), 20% weave (T3), 35% weave (T4), and 55% weave (T5) were selected as treatments. In both years of the study, yield and % marketable fruit increased significantly as overall % weave resulted in shading increases. The effect of 35% weave on yield and % marketable fruit was more distinct. The highest leaf area was recorded with T5 while the highest trunk cross-section area (6.16 and 6.64 cm2 plant−1 in 2015 and 2016, respectively) and canopy volume (2.70 and 2.92 m3 plant−1) were obtained in T3 treatment. Mass and diameter of fruit harvested from the T4 treatment (259.8 and 253.8 g, 76.3 and 74.4 mm, 92.5 and 90.3 mm in 2015 and 2016, respectively) were significantly higher than fruit of the other treatments. Fruit firmness under the protective shade netting (70.5, 71.4, 69.4, 73.1 N and 72.9, 75.6, 69.7, 72.3 N from T2 to T5 in 2015 and 2016, respectively) was significantly lower than that of the control (76.0 and 81.5 N in 2015 and 2016 respectively). As the % weave increased, the soluble solids decreased. In both years of the experiment, ferulic acid, o-coumaric and p-coumaric acid, phlorodzin, rutin and vanilic acid were significantly higher in shade-grown apples compared to control. Similarly, oxalic and fumaric acid concentrations of the apples grown in shade were significantly higher than the control fruit (3.43 and 6.34 mg kg−1, and 2.47 and 2.73 mg kg−1 in 2015 and 2016 respectively). Consequently, shade netting treatments had a positive effect on tree growth, yield, and fruit quality. Protective netting with 35% (T4) weave resulted in highest yield increase as well as % marketable fruit. Novelty impact statement Protective shade cloth with different % weave was studied. All shading treatments had a positive effect on tree growth, yield, and fruit quality. We found that 35% (T4) weave produced significantly higher yields of better quality, more marketable fruit.
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
Yield and percent marketable fruit of apple increased significantly as the percent weave of the shade net (shading) increased.
- Taxon
- apple
Malus domesticat0 - Treatment
- overall % weavee1
- Outcome
- yield and % marketable fruite1
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- unnettede2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“yield and % marketable fruit increased significantly as overall % weave resulted in shading increases”
e2“control (unnetted, T1)”
Claim · model-written summary
The effect of 35% weave on yield and percent marketable fruit was more distinct than that of the other nets.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- 35% weavee1
- Outcome
- yield and % marketable fruite1
- Direction
- more distincte1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“The effect of 35% weave on yield and % marketable fruit was more distinct”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest leaf area was recorded with T5 (55% weave).
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- T5e1
- Outcome
- leaf areae1
- Direction
- higheste1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“The highest leaf area was recorded with T5”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest trunk cross-section area, 6.16 and 6.64 cm2 per plant in 2015 and 2016, was obtained with T3 (20% weave).
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- T3 treatmente2
- Outcome
- trunk cross-section areae1
- Direction
- higheste1
- Value
- 6.16 and 6.64 cm2 plant−1e1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“the highest trunk cross-section area (6.16 and 6.64 cm2 plant−1 in 2015 and 2016, respectively)”
e2“obtained in T3 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
The highest canopy volume, 2.70 and 2.92 m3 per plant, was obtained with T3 (20% weave).
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- T3 treatmente1
- Outcome
- canopy volumee1
- Value
- 2.70 and 2.92 m3 plant−1e1
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“canopy volume (2.70 and 2.92 m3 plant−1) were obtained in T3 treatment”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit mass from the T4 (35% weave) treatment, 259.8 and 253.8 g in 2015 and 2016, was significantly higher than fruit of the other treatments.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- T4 treatmente1
- Outcome
- Masse1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 259.8 and 253.8 ge1
- Comparator
- the other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“Mass and diameter of fruit harvested from the T4 treatment (259.8 and 253.8 g, 76.3 and 74.4 mm, 92.5 and 90.3 mm in 2015 and 2016, respectively) were significantly higher than fruit of the other treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit diameter from the T4 (35% weave) treatment (76.3 and 74.4 mm; 92.5 and 90.3 mm in 2015 and 2016) was significantly higher than fruit of the other treatments.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- T4 treatmente1
- Outcome
- diametere1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 76.3 and 74.4 mm, 92.5 and 90.3 mme1
- Comparator
- the other treatmentse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“Mass and diameter of fruit harvested from the T4 treatment (259.8 and 253.8 g, 76.3 and 74.4 mm, 92.5 and 90.3 mm in 2015 and 2016, respectively) were significantly higher than fruit of the other treatments”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit firmness under shade netting (T2 to T5) was significantly lower than in the control.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- protective shade nettinge1
- Outcome
- Fruit firmnesse1
- Direction
- lowere1
- Value
- 70.5, 71.4, 69.4, 73.1 N and 72.9, 75.6, 69.7, 72.3 Ne1
- Qualifier
- 76.0 and 81.5 N in 2015 and 2016e1
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“Fruit firmness under the protective shade netting (70.5, 71.4, 69.4, 73.1 N and 72.9, 75.6, 69.7, 72.3 N from T2 to T5 in 2015 and 2016, respectively) was significantly lower than that of the control (76.0 and 81.5 N in 2015 and 2016 respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
Soluble solids decreased as the percent weave of the shade net increased.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- % weavee1
- Outcome
- soluble solidse1
- Direction
- decreasede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“As the % weave increased, the soluble solids decreased”
Claim · model-written summary
Ferulic acid, o-coumaric acid and p-coumaric acid were significantly higher in shade-grown apples than in control in both years.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- shade-growne1
- Outcome
- ferulic acid, o-coumaric and p-coumaric acide1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“ferulic acid, o-coumaric and p-coumaric acid, phlorodzin, rutin and vanilic acid were significantly higher in shade-grown apples compared to control”
Claim · model-written summary
Phlorodzin, rutin and vanilic acid were significantly higher in shade-grown apples than in control in both years.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- shade-growne1
- Outcome
- phlorodzin, rutin and vanilic acide1
- Direction
- highere1
- Comparator
- controle1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“ferulic acid, o-coumaric and p-coumaric acid, phlorodzin, rutin and vanilic acid were significantly higher in shade-grown apples compared to control”
Claim · model-written summary
Oxalic acid concentration was significantly higher in apples grown in shade than in control fruit (3.43 and 6.34 mg per kg in 2015 and 2016).
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- grown in shadee1
- Outcome
- oxalice1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 3.43 and 6.34 mg kg−1e1
- Comparator
- control fruite1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“oxalic and fumaric acid concentrations of the apples grown in shade were significantly higher than the control fruit (3.43 and 6.34 mg kg−1, and 2.47 and 2.73 mg kg−1 in 2015 and 2016 respectively)”
Claim · model-written summary
Fumaric acid concentration was significantly higher in apples grown in shade than in control fruit (2.47 and 2.73 mg per kg in 2015 and 2016).
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- grown in shadee1
- Outcome
- fumaric acid concentrationse1
- Direction
- highere1
- Value
- 2.47 and 2.73 mg kg−1e1
- Comparator
- control fruite1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“Granny Smith Challenger apple”
e1“oxalic and fumaric acid concentrations of the apples grown in shade were significantly higher than the control fruit (3.43 and 6.34 mg kg−1, and 2.47 and 2.73 mg kg−1 in 2015 and 2016 respectively)”
The same questions in other papers
shade · molecular: metabolites · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
shade · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →trap barrier · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- no effect
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 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.