Abstract
Abstract Increasing daylength inhibited budbreak, while high temp hastened it. The initiation of flowering was promoted by high light intensity and long days. The effect of daylength was temp dependent. At low temp rose shoots differentiated more leaves before flower initiation with short days than with long days, while at high temp there was no significant difference. Rate of shoot growth was stimulated by long day and high temp. The final length of shoots at flowering was significantly longer with 16-hr days than shorter days, while increasing temp and light intensity decreased shoot length. Growth of the uppermost internodes, especially the neck, was most sensitive to daylength, temp, and light intensity. The number of days from cut back until flowering was decreased by increasing daylength, temp, and light intensity. The great fluctuation in number of days from cut to cut in greenhouse roses in the course of the year was due to change in light intensity, daylength, and temp.
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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing daylength inhibited rose budbreak.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increasing daylength inhibited budbreak”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
High temperature hastened rose budbreak.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Increasing daylength inhibited budbreak, while high temp hastened it”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
High light intensity promoted flower initiation.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The initiation of flowering was promoted by high light intensity and long days”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Long days promoted flower initiation.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The initiation of flowering was promoted by high light intensity and long days”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
At low temperature, short days led to more leaves before flower initiation than long days.
Verbatim
e0“At low temp rose shoots differentiated more leaves before flower initiation with short days than with long days”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
At high temperature, leaf number before flower initiation did not differ significantly between daylengths.
- Taxon
- Rosest0
- Treatment
- daylengthe0
- Outcome
- leaves before flower initiatione0
- Direction
- no significant differencee0
- Qualifier
- high tempe0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The effect of daylength was temp dependent. At low temp rose shoots differentiated more leaves before flower initiation with short days than with long days, while at high temp there was no significant difference”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Long days stimulated shoot growth rate.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Rate of shoot growth was stimulated by long day and high temp”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
High temperature stimulated shoot growth rate.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“Rate of shoot growth was stimulated by long day and high temp”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Shoots at flowering were longer under 16-hour days than shorter days.
Verbatim
e0“The final length of shoots at flowering was significantly longer with 16-hr days than shorter days”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing temperature decreased shoot length.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“increasing temp and light intensity decreased shoot length”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing light intensity decreased shoot length.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“increasing temp and light intensity decreased shoot length”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
The uppermost internodes, especially the neck, were most sensitive to daylength, temperature and light intensity.
Verbatim
e0“Growth of the uppermost internodes, especially the neck, was most sensitive to daylength, temp, and light intensity”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing daylength shortened the interval from cutback to flowering.
- Taxon
- Rosest0
- Treatment
- increasing daylengthe0
- Outcome
- number of days from cut back until floweringe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The number of days from cut back until flowering was decreased by increasing daylength, temp, and light intensity”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing temperature shortened the interval from cutback to flowering.
- Taxon
- Rosest0
- Treatment
- tempe0
- Outcome
- number of days from cut back until floweringe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The number of days from cut back until flowering was decreased by increasing daylength, temp, and light intensity”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing light intensity shortened the interval from cutback to flowering.
- Taxon
- Rosest0
- Treatment
- light intensitye0
- Outcome
- number of days from cut back until floweringe0
- Direction
- decreasede0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“The number of days from cut back until flowering was decreased by increasing daylength, temp, and light intensity”
t0“Roses”
Claim · model-written summary
Seasonal fluctuations in greenhouse rose cutting intervals were attributed to light intensity, daylength and temperature.
Verbatim
e0“The great fluctuation in number of days from cut to cut in greenhouse roses in the course of the year was due to change in light intensity, daylength, and temp”
The same questions in other papers
light · phenology · RosaPositive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
11 papers more in this group
See all 15 papers →light · growth · RosaPositive and negative results
22 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- no effect
24 papers more in this group
See all 28 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.