Claim · model-written summary
Pear flowering was 11.5 days earlier after warm dormancy periods.
- Taxon
- pear
_Poirier_Fleurs_et_feuilles.jpg?width=60)
Pyrus communise0 - Outcome
- flowering datese1
- Direction
- earliere1
- Value
- 11.5 dayse0
- Setting
- warm dormancy periodse1
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Poirier_Fleurs_et_feuilles.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“and 11.5 days for pear”
e1“Median flowering dates of apple were on average 9.5 days earlier following warm dormancy periods”
Title
Comparing Apple and Pear Phenology and Model Performance: What Seven Decades of Observations Reveal
Bianca Drepper; Anne Gobin; Serge Remy; et al. Agronomy 2020. doi:10.3390/agronomy10010073
Other claims from this paper (8)
- Association Apple flowering was 9.5 days earlier after warm dormancy periods.
- Association The bloom date and temperature relationship was nonlinear.
- Observation After warm chilling, models predicted apple dormancy break 5.0 days later.
- Observation After warm chilling, models predicted pear dormancy break 10.6 days later.
- Method / resource PLSR gave mixed signals about flowering onset after warm chilling.
- Method / resource A dynamic chill model with growing degree days had lower flowering prediction errors than a continuous chill-forcing model.
- Method / resource Model performance was sensitive to parametrization method.
- Method / resource Application of both models outside prior temperature ranges showed limitations.