Abstract
Abstract Mature ‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] trees were dormant pruned, summer pruned, or summer topped for 4 consecutive years. Dormant-pruned trees defoliated slightly earlier than summer-pruned trees, but the onset and duration of terminal vegetative bud rest was not influenced by pruning treatment. Compared to dormant pruning, summer topping slightly reduced cold hardiness of flower buds on 2 of 4 test dates in 1982, but not in 1984. Bloom on vertical shoots in the upper canopy was advanced by summer pruning and by summer topping in both 1982 and 1983. Bloom development at other canopy positions was not influenced by pruning treatment.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 7
Claim · model-written summary
Dormant pruning led to slightly earlier defoliation than summer pruning.
- Taxon
- peach
Prunus persicat0 - Treatment
- Dormant-prunede0
- Outcome
- defoliatede0
- Direction
- slightly earliere0
- Comparator
- summer-prunede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Dormant-pruned trees defoliated slightly earlier than summer-pruned trees”
t0“‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch]”
Claim · model-written summary
Pruning did not influence onset or duration of terminal vegetative bud rest.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- pruning treatmente0
- Outcome
- onset and duration of terminal vegetative bud reste0
- Direction
- not influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the onset and duration of terminal vegetative bud rest was not influenced by pruning treatment.”
t0“‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch]”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer topping slightly reduced flower-bud cold hardiness versus dormant pruning on two 1982 test dates.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- summer toppinge0
- Outcome
- cold hardiness of flower budse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- 2 of 4 test datese0
- Qualifier
- in 1982e0
- Comparator
- dormant pruninge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to dormant pruning, summer topping slightly reduced cold hardiness of flower buds on 2 of 4 test dates in 1982, but not in 1984.”
t0“‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch]”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer topping did not reduce flower-bud cold hardiness in 1984.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- summer toppinge0
- Outcome
- cold hardiness of flower budse0
- Direction
- note0
- Qualifier
- in 1984e0
- Comparator
- dormant pruninge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Compared to dormant pruning, summer topping slightly reduced cold hardiness of flower buds on 2 of 4 test dates in 1982, but not in 1984.”
t0“‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch]”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer pruning advanced bloom on vertical upper-canopy shoots in 1982 and 1983.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- summer pruninge0
- Outcome
- Bloom on vertical shoots in the upper canopye0
- Direction
- advancede0
- Qualifier
- both 1982 and 1983e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bloom on vertical shoots in the upper canopy was advanced by summer pruning and by summer topping in both 1982 and 1983.”
t0“‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch]”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer topping advanced bloom on vertical upper-canopy shoots in 1982 and 1983.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- summer toppinge0
- Outcome
- Bloom on vertical shoots in the upper canopye0
- Direction
- advancede0
- Qualifier
- both 1982 and 1983e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bloom on vertical shoots in the upper canopy was advanced by summer pruning and by summer topping in both 1982 and 1983.”
t0“‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch]”
Claim · model-written summary
Pruning did not influence bloom development at other canopy positions.
- Taxon
- peachPrunus persicat0
- Treatment
- pruning treatmente0
- Outcome
- Bloom development at other canopy positionse0
- Direction
- not influencede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Bloom development at other canopy positions was not influenced by pruning treatment.”
t0“‘Sunqueen’ peach [ Prunus persica (L.) Batsch]”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · growth · Prunus persica (peach)Results differ
21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 42 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
60 papers more in this group
See all 64 papers →pruning · tolerance: abiotic · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.