Paper · 1990 · HortScience

INFLUENCE OF GIBBERELLIC ACID AND FUNGICIDE EXPERIMENTS ON YIELD, QUALITY AND DISEASE CONTROL OF `CHENIN BLANC' GRAPES IN -SOUTHEAST TEXAS.

Iva Suzanne Wilson; George Ray McEachern; J Dan Hanna

5
claims
10
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Gibberellic acid and fungicide experiments were conducted in 1988 and 1989 to examine their effect on yield, quality and disease control of 'Chenin Blanc' grapes in Southeast Texas. Gibberellic acid applied 7 and 14 days prior to bloom at 2.5 and 5.0 ppm reduced the number of berries per cluster in 1988 and 1989. The 2.5 ppm rate reduced berries and increased yield. The GA treatments also reduced bunch rot at harvest. Benomyl + Manzate fungicide treatments were superior to Nova and control in reducing bunch rot.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. 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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Gibberellic acid applied before bloom reduced berries per cluster in both years.

Taxon
grapest0
Material
CHENIN BLANCt0
Treatment
Gibberellic acid applied 7 and 14 days prior to bloom at 2.5 and 5.0 ppme0
Outcome
number of berries per clustere0
Direction
reducede0
Setting
Southeast Texast0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Gibberellic acid applied 7 and 14 days prior to bloom at 2.5 and 5.0 ppm reduced the number of berries per cluster in 1988 and 1989”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 182–313 · show in text ↑
t0

“`CHENIN BLANC' GRAPES IN -SOUTHEAST TEXAS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 97–138 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 2.5 ppm gibberellic acid rate reduced berries.

Taxon
grapest0
Treatment
2.5 ppm ratee0
Outcome
berriese0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The 2.5 ppm rate reduced berries and increased yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 315–367 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 112–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 2.5 ppm rate increased yield.

Taxon
grapest0
Treatment
2.5 ppm ratee0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The 2.5 ppm rate reduced berries and increased yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 315–367 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 112–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

GA treatments reduced bunch rot at harvest.

Taxon
grapest0
Treatment
GA treatmentse0
Outcome
bunch rote0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The GA treatments also reduced bunch rot at harvest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 369–420 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 112–118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Benomyl plus Manzate reduced bunch rot more than Nova and control.

Taxon
grapest0
Treatment
Benomyl + Manzate fungicide treatmentse0
Outcome
bunch rote0
Direction
reducinge0
Comparator
Nova and controle0

Verbatim

e0

“Benomyl + Manzate fungicide treatments were superior to Nova and control in reducing bunch rot”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 422–516 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPES”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 112–118 · show in text ↑

Gibberellic acid · molecular: metabolites · VitisResults differ

30 papers: 23 positive, 7 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

26 papers more in this group

See all 30 papers →

Gibberellic acid · disease · VitisPositive and negative results

9 papers: 7 positive, 2 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

5 papers more in this group

See all 9 papers →

benomyl · disease · VitisResults agree

6 papers: 6 positive, 0 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

fungicide · disease · VitisPositive and negative results

26 papers: 22 positive, 4 negative or no effect

21 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

22 papers more in this group

See all 26 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.