Claim · model-written summary
For both rootstocks, nonfruiting spur leaves had intermediate photosynthesis rates.
- Taxon
- apple
Malus domesticat0 - Organ / stage
- S − F leavese0
- Outcome
- P n ratee1
- Direction
- intermediatee0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Verbatim
e0“S − F leaves had intermediate values”
e1“Shoot leaves, spur leaves on spurs without fruit (S − F), and spur leaves on spurs with fruit (S + F) from trees on M.26 EMLA and OAR 1 showed no differences in P n rates. However, for both rootstocks, shoot leaves had the highest P n rate, S + F the lowest, and S − F leaves had intermediate values”
t0“Apple”
Title
Apple tree canopy development and photosynthesis as affected by rootstock
Ido Schechter; D. C. Elfving; J. T. A. Proctor Canadian Journal of Botany 1991. doi:10.1139/b91-039
Other claims from this paper (11)
- Intervention effect Rootstock affected the amount of structural wood.
- Intervention effect Rootstock affected the rate of canopy development.
- Intervention effect Rootstock affected final leaf area.
- Intervention effect Rootstock did not affect the sigmoidal canopy development pattern.
- Association Light interception was linearly correlated with tree dimensions.
- Association Light interception was linearly correlated with yield.
- Association Trees on dwarfing rootstocks tended to have lower leaf net photosynthesis than trees on more vigorous rootstocks.
- Intervention effect Rootstock did not affect the scion photosynthesis response to illumination.
- Observation The authors reported no photosynthesis differences among shoot and spur leaf types on M.26 EMLA and OAR 1.
- Observation For both rootstocks, shoot leaves had the highest photosynthesis rate.
- Observation For both rootstocks, fruiting spur leaves had the lowest photosynthesis rate.