Claim · model-written summary
Specific leaf weight was lower in fruiting than defruited trees in one experiment.
- Taxon
- treese0
- Treatment
- fruitinge0
- Outcome
- specific leaf weighte0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Comparator
- defruited treese0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleSettingValueQualifier
Verbatim
e0“In one experiment, specific leaf weight (SLW) was less for fruiting trees than for defruited trees”
Title
Jeff A. Erf; John T.A. Proctor Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 1989. doi:10.21273/jashs.114.2.191
Other claims from this paper (17)
- Intervention effect Tent covers tended to reduce fruit diameter.
- Intervention effect Tent covers increased soluble solids concentration on one occasion.
- Intervention effect Tent covers increased fruit firmness on one occasion.
- Intervention effect Fruit reduced trunk growth more than covers did.
- Intervention effect Covers did not change trunk growth in fruiting trees.
- Intervention effect Covers reduced trunk growth in defruited trees.
- Intervention effect Fruit load and reduced soil water did not affect terminal shoot length.
- Intervention effect Fruiting increased foliar N, P and Ca.
- Intervention effect Fruiting increased foliar Mg.
- Intervention effect Fruiting decreased foliar K concentration.
- Intervention effect On a leaf-area basis, K was lower in cropping trees.
- Intervention effect On a leaf-area basis, other nutrients remained mostly unchanged in cropping trees.
- Intervention effect Tent covers generally lowered foliar N, P and K.
- Intervention effect Leaf water potential was lower in fruiting trees.
- Intervention effect Leaf water potential tended to be lower under tent covers.
- Intervention effect Stomatal conductance was higher in fruiting than defruited trees.
- Intervention effect Stomatal conductance was higher without tent covers.