Abstract
Summer pruning of apples, as opposed to the conventional commercial practice of dormant pruning, consistently reduced the incidence of flyspeck on apple fruit by approximately 50% in each of 2 years in trees where no fungicides were applied. In commercial orchard blocks using fungicides, summer pruning also produced a slight but significant decrease in disease severity. There appear to be at least two mechanisms contributing to decreased flyspeck incidence and severity in summer-pruned apple trees. Summer pruning resulted in a small change in the apple canopy microclimate, decreasing the hours of relative humidity >95% in the canopy by 63% and increasing the evaporative potential. Summer pruning also resulted in improved spray deposition in the upper two-thirds of the tree canopy when applications were made with an airblast sprayer.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed public-domain. 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
Claim · model-written summary
Summer pruning reduced flyspeck incidence by about 50% versus dormant pruning in unsprayed apple trees.
- Taxon
- apples
Malus domesticae0 - Treatment
- Summer pruninge0
- Outcome
- incidence of flyspecke0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Value
- approximately 50%e0
- Comparator
- dormant pruninge0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Summer pruning of apples, as opposed to the conventional commercial practice of dormant pruning, consistently reduced the incidence of flyspeck on apple fruit by approximately 50% in each of 2 years in trees where no fungicides were applied”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer pruning slightly but significantly decreased flyspeck severity in fungicide-treated commercial orchards.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- summer pruninge0
- Outcome
- disease severitye0
- Direction
- decreasee0
- Setting
- commercial orchard blockse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In commercial orchard blocks using fungicides, summer pruning also produced a slight but significant decrease in disease severity”
t0“Apple”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer pruning decreased hours above 95% relative humidity in the apple canopy by 63%.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- Summer pruninge0
- Outcome
- hours of relative humidity >95% in the canopye0
- Direction
- decreasinge0
- Value
- 63%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Summer pruning resulted in a small change in the apple canopy microclimate, decreasing the hours of relative humidity >95% in the canopy by 63%”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer pruning increased evaporative potential.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Summer Pruningt0
- Outcome
- evaporative potentiale0
- Direction
- increasinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“increasing the evaporative potential”
t0“Summer Pruning as a Method for Reducing Flyspeck Disease on Apple Fruit”
Claim · model-written summary
Summer pruning improved spray deposition in the upper two-thirds of the canopy with an airblast sprayer.
- Taxon
- AppleMalus domesticat0
- Treatment
- Summer pruninge0
- Outcome
- spray depositione0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Qualifier
- upper two-thirds of the tree canopye0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Summer pruning also resulted in improved spray deposition in the upper two-thirds of the tree canopy when applications were made with an airblast sprayer”
t0“Apple”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · disease · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- negative
20 papers more in this group
See all 24 papers →pruning · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
57 papers in the same direction as this paper · 47 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
102 papers more in this group
See all 106 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.