Claim · model-written summary
Endodormancy duration of peach, as measured by GA 3 forcing of terminal leaf buds, was proportional to leaf retention.
- Taxon
- peach
Prunus persicae0 - Organ / stage
- terminal leaf budse1
- Outcome
- endodormancy duratione1
- Direction
- proportionale1
- Qualifier
- as measured by GA 3 forcinge1
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingValue
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar applications of growth regulators (GR) in early autumn induced leaf retention (LR) on peach”
e1“Increased endodormancy duration, as measured by GA 3 forcing of terminal leaf buds, was proportional to LR”
Title
Schuyler D. Seeley; Hossein Damavandy; J. LaMar Anderson; et al. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 1992. doi:10.21273/jashs.117.2.203
Other claims from this paper (9)
- Intervention effect In Johnson Elberta peach, NAA and Promalin were the most effective growth regulators for leaf retention, ranked above GA 4+7, GA 3, BA and control.
- Intervention effect GR-induced chlorophyll content in retained leaves of peach was highest with BA + GA 4+7 and lowest with NAA.
- Intervention effect Xanthophyll content of retained peach leaves was highest with NAA.
- Intervention effect Treating only half of a peach tree with NAA did not affect leaf retention on the untreated side.
- Intervention effect NAA decreased subsequent bud and flower size in peach.
- Intervention effect NAA enhanced bud hardiness in Johnson Elberta peach.
- Intervention effect NAA did not enhance bud hardiness in Redhaven peach.
- Intervention effect NAA did not enhance bud hardiness in Montmorency tart cherry.
- Intervention effect NAA increased hardening on both the foliated and defoliated sides of half-treated Johnson Elberta peach trees.