Claim · model-written summary
Auxin treatments did not consistently reduce fruit set on remaining clusters.
- Taxon
- Apple
Malus domesticat0 - Treatment
- auxin treatmente0
- Outcome
- fruit set on the remaining clusterse0
- Direction
- Neithere0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Neither auxin treatment consistently reduced fruit set on the remaining clusters, resulting in “clustering””
t0“Apple Blossoms”
Title
Sunghee Guak; Michael Beulah; Norman E. Looney; et al. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science 2002. doi:10.21273/jashs.127.2.165
Other claims from this paper (12)
- Intervention effect MCPB-ethyl increased whole flower cluster removal with rate up to 20 mg per liter.
- Intervention effect NAA increased whole flower cluster removal with rate up to 21 mg per liter.
- Intervention effect MCPB-ethyl did not thin apple blossoms in the Corvallis experiment.
- Intervention effect Ethephon with NAA further reduced crop load.
- Intervention effect Carbaryl reduced crop load by increasing whole cluster removal and single-fruit sites.
- Intervention effect Auxin treatments generally did not improve return flowering except with excessive crop reduction.
- Intervention effect Ethephon promoted return flowering.
- Intervention effect Carbaryl promoted return flowering more strongly than ethephon.
- Intervention effect Bloom-time auxin countered carbaryl promotion of return flowering.
- Intervention effect Ethephon overcame negative auxin effects.
- Intervention effect Combined ethephon and carbaryl reduced crop load.
- Intervention effect Combined ethephon and carbaryl benefited return flowering.