Intervention effectmodel-written summary

Root pruning reduced root length density of peach roots in the 0 to 90-cm root zone.

A claim from Growth, Yield, and Water Use Responses of Peach to Repeated Root Pruning in a Sub-humid Climate · 1995

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Root pruning reduced root length density of peach roots in the 0 to 90-cm root zone.

Treatment
root pruninge0
Outcome
root length densitye0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
0 to 90-cm root zonee0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleComparatorSettingValue

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

Prunus persica
Prunus persica · TaxonAllagash Brewing · CC BY 2.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The root length density of peach roots was greatest in the 0 to 30-cm depth, was promoted by irrigation, and was reduced by root pruning in the 0 to 90-cm root zone”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 735–899

Title

Growth, Yield, and Water Use Responses of Peach to Repeated Root Pruning in a Sub-humid Climate

D.M. Glenn; S.S. Miller HortScience 1995. doi:10.21273/hortsci.30.3.543

Other claims from this paper (11)

Record rev-f66a782436985f287d1833a5bb09131fe3a9b5c52395f55ca0c447fb909722e0 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 5 in the model’s answer

pruning · growth · Prunus persica (peach)Results differ

64 papers: 42 positive, 22 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this claim · 42 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
    Root competition, summer pruning and regulated irrigation all appeared to inhibit peach tree growth.

    Control of Peach Tree Growth and Productivity by Regulated Water Supply, Tree Density, and Summer Pruning1 · 1981

    Opposite directionCited by this paper

  2. negative
    Girdles wider than 5 mm decreased callus formation in the other cultivars.

    Girdling as a means of increasing fruit size and earliness in peach and nectarine cultivars · 1987

    Same directionCited by this paper

  3. positive
    July or June–July pruning or topping stimulated young Cresthaven shoot growth more than dormant pruning.

    Vegetative Growth, Yield, and Fruit Quality of Peach as Influenced by Dormant Pruning, Summer Pruning, and Summer Topping · 1985 · compared with dormant pruning

    Opposite direction

  4. positive
    Girdling at this time more than doubled the percentage of fruit in the largest three size categories

    Girdling of early season ‘Mayfire’ nectarine trees · 1990

    Opposite direction

  5. positive
    Bloom thinning increased peach shoot growth by 53% compared with hand thinning 44 days after full bloom.

    The influence of bloom thinning and GA3sprays on flower bud numbers and distribution in peach trees · 1990 · compared with trees hand thinned 44 days after full bloom

    Opposite direction

  6. positive
    Partial flower thinning increased the share of large fruit relative to unthinned and later thinned trees.

    Partial Flower Thinning Increases Shoot Growth, Fruit Size, and Subsequent Flower Formation of Peach · 2002 · compared with unthinned trees or trees thinned entirely at 42 DAFB

    Opposite direction

  7. positive
    Severe pruning tended to enhance young shoot growth on fruit bearing shoots and scaffold branches.

    Pruning intensity and fruit load influence vegetative and fruit growth in an early-maturing peach tree (cv. Alexandra) · 2005

    Opposite direction

  8. positive
    Long pruning reduced total new shoot growth per tree relative to short pruning.

    Responses of peach trees to modified pruning 1. Vegetative growth · 1994 · compared with SP

    Opposite direction

55 papers more in this group

See all 64 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.