Intervention effectmodel-written summary

The new training and pruning system caused rapid tree growth and much young wood.

A claim from Intensive plum orchard with summer training and pruning · 2019

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The new training and pruning system caused rapid tree growth and much young wood.

Treatment
new training and pruning systeme0
Outcome
tree growth, much young woode0
Direction
very rapide0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier

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

Prunus domestica
Prunus domestica · TaxonYAMAMAYA · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“plum orchard”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 10–22
e0

“The new training and pruning system resulted in very rapid tree growth, much young wood, fruit bud formation on young wood and early bearing”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 544–684

Title

Intensive plum orchard with summer training and pruning

Mika, A.; Buler, Z. DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) 2019. doi:10.13128/ahs-12769

Other claims from this paper (2)

Record rev-84cf8851d90d74277194f35cd0bdc0a7c19aa46f611a8583d35d67b28ca346a8 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 1 in the model’s answer

pruning · growth · Prunus domestica (plum)Positive and negative results

14 papers: 8 positive, 6 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this claim · 5 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. positive
    The new training and pruning systems produced rapid tree growth.

    Mechanical harvesting of plums for processing with a continuously moving combine harvester · 2012

    Same directionCites this paper

  2. negative
    Wangenheim Prune rootstock reduced growth about 20-50% compared with Myrobalan.

    THE GROWTH AND YIELDS OF EIGHT PLUM CULTIVARS GRAFTED ON TWO ROOTSTOCKS IN CENTRAL POLAND · 2010 · compared with Myrobalan

    Opposite direction

  3. no effect
    Pruning time did not influence vegetative growth.

    EFFECT OF PRUNING TIME ON GROWTH, BLOOMING AND CONTENT OF CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS IN LEAVES OF FOUR EARLY RIPENING PLUM CULTIVARS · 2010

    Opposite direction

  4. negative
    Root pruning decreased the average length of annual growth (51.1 cm).

    The Influence of Cutting Roots on the Growth and Fruiting of ‘Top Group’ Plum Cultivars · 2019

    Opposite direction

  5. negative
    Prunasin inhibited Marianna plum callus growth.

    Effect of Cyanogenic Glycosides on Growth of Callus from Almond and Plum · 1985

    Opposite direction

  6. no effect
    PDV did not significantly affect tree vigour.

    The Effect of Viral Infection on the Growth of HoneySweet GM Plum Trees · 2026

    Opposite direction

  7. no effect
    Greengage growth rate did not differ significantly between mixed and single virus infections.

    Effect of virus infection on growth and cropping of Greengage and Billington plum trees · 1984 · compared with Prunus necrotic ringspot virus alone

    No difference from an alternative

  8. positive
    Severe winter pruning enhanced rooting of conventional and in vitro-derived plum cuttings compared with lighter pruning.

    Long-term improvement in the rooting of plum cuttings following apparent rejuvenation · 1989 · compared with lighter pruning

    Same direction

5 papers more in this group

See all 14 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.