Paper · 1972 · HortScience

Influence of Longtime Nitrogen, Pruning and Irrigation Treatments Upon Yield, Growth, and Longevity of ‘Elberta’ and ‘Redhaven’ Peach Trees1

George A. Cummings; W. E. Ballinger

7
claims
14
verbatim quotes
6
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc-nd

Abstract

Abstract Irrigation did not influence total yield, growth, or longevity of ‘Elberta’ or ‘Redhaven’ peach trees. Yields were depressed when N was reduced to 0.2 kg/tree (approx 1/2 recommended rate) with both cultivars. Increasing N above the recommended rate did not influence yield. Highest yields were obtained with lightest pruning level but fruit size was reduced. Random tree loss occurred with all treatments but was highest with low N rates.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Irrigation did not influence total yield, growth or longevity of peach trees.

Taxon
Peach TreesPrunus persicat0
Treatment
Irrigatione0
Outcome
total yield, growth, or longevitye0
Direction
did not influencee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peach Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–139 · show in text ↑
e0

“Irrigation did not influence total yield, growth, or longevity of”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 9–74 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yields of both cultivars were depressed when N was reduced to 0.2 kg/tree, about half the recommended rate.

Taxon
Peach TreesPrunus persicat0
Material
both cultivarse1
Treatment
N was reduced to 0.2 kg/treee1
Outcome
Yieldse1
Direction
depressede1
Value
0.2 kg/treee1
Comparator
recommended ratee1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peach Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–139 · show in text ↑
e1

“Yields were depressed when N was reduced to 0.2 kg/tree (approx 1/2 recommended rate) with both cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 112–217 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Increasing N above the recommended rate did not influence yield.

Taxon
Peach TreesPrunus persicat0
Treatment
Increasing N above the recommended ratee2
Outcome
yielde2
Direction
did not influencee2
Comparator
recommended ratee2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peach Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–139 · show in text ↑
e2

“Increasing N above the recommended rate did not influence yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 219–282 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Highest yields were obtained with the lightest pruning level.

Taxon
Peach TreesPrunus persicat0
Treatment
lightest pruning levele3
Outcome
yieldse3
Direction
Higheste3

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peach Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–139 · show in text ↑
e3

“Highest yields were obtained with lightest pruning level but fruit size was reduced”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 284–367 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The lightest pruning level reduced fruit size.

Taxon
Peach TreesPrunus persicat0
Treatment
lightest pruning levele3
Outcome
fruit sizee3
Direction
reducede3

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peach Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–139 · show in text ↑
e3

“Highest yields were obtained with lightest pruning level but fruit size was reduced”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 284–367 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Random tree loss was highest with low N rates.

Taxon
Peach TreesPrunus persicat0
Treatment
low N ratese4
Outcome
Random tree losse4
Direction
higheste4

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peach Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–139 · show in text ↑
e4

“Random tree loss occurred with all treatments but was highest with low N rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 369–447 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Random tree loss occurred with all treatments.

Taxon
Peach TreesPrunus persicat0
Treatment
all treatmentse4
Outcome
Random tree losse4

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Peach Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 128–139 · show in text ↑
e4

“Random tree loss occurred with all treatments but was highest with low N rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 369–447 · show in text ↑

irrigation · pest · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 3 positive, 3 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

light · yield · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

pruning · yield · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results

97 papers: 63 positive, 34 negative or no effect

62 papers in the same direction as this paper · 32 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

93 papers more in this group

See all 97 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.