Abstract
Abstract There was no effect of rootstock on the net photosynthesis (Pn) of 1-year-old vegetative, containergrown ‘Delicious’ trees in 2 experiments. Rootstock effects on specific leaf weight (SLW) were slight in one experiment, and absent in another. There was no influence of rootstock on shoot growth, leaf number, transpiration rate (Tr) or dark respiration (Rd), each of which was determined in one experiment. These data fail to support reports of differences in Pn within a given cultivar on various rootstocks.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 4
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock did not affect net photosynthesis in two experiments.
- Taxon
- Apple
Malus domesticat0 - Material
- ‘Delicious’e0
- Treatment
- rootstocke0
- Outcome
- net photosynthesise0
- Direction
- no effecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no effect of rootstock on the net photosynthesis (Pn) of 1-year-old vegetative, containergrown ‘Delicious’ trees in 2 experiments”
t0“Apple Leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock had slight effects on specific leaf weight in one experiment.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Rootstocke0
- Outcome
- specific leaf weighte0
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Rootstock effects on specific leaf weight (SLW) were slight in one experiment”
t0“Apple Leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock had no effect on specific leaf weight in another experiment.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Rootstocke1
- Outcome
- specific leaf weighte1
- Direction
- absente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“absent in another”
e1“Rootstock effects on specific leaf weight (SLW)”
t0“Apple Leaves”
Claim · model-written summary
Rootstock did not influence shoot growth, leaf number, transpiration rate or dark respiration.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- rootstocke0
- Outcome
- shoot growth, leaf number, transpiration rate (Tr) or dark respiration (Rd)e0
- Direction
- no influencee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“no influence of rootstock on shoot growth, leaf number, transpiration rate (Tr) or dark respiration (Rd)”
t0“Apple Leaves”
The same questions in other papers
grafting · physiology: gas exchange · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
grafting · physiology: photosynthesis · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →grafting · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
16 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- positive
37 papers more in this group
See all 41 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.