Abstract
The prebloom application of SADH (succinic acid-2, 2-dimethyl hydrazide) to clusters of Kyoho (V×L) by spraying at 2500 ppm was as effective for increasing the set of seeded berries as foliar treatment at the same concentration or prebloom shoot pinching. The spraying on cluster had no inhibitory effect on shoot growth during bloom and set stages. Nearly the same trend as above was observed in Muscat of Alexandria (V) to which CCC (2-chloroethyl trimethylammonium chloride) was applied at 200 ppm. These results reconfirmed those of our earlier study. In both cultivars, the application of the growth retardants to either clusters or leaves distinctly reduced the gibberellin activity in florets at the beginning of bloom, whereas the shoot pinching raised the activity in Muscat or did not affect it in Kyoho. On the other hand, the cytokinin activity in florets was markedly enhanced by the retardant applications and the shoot pinching in both cultivars.These results indicate that reduction of shoot growth is not essential to exert the promotive effect of growth retardants on the set of seeded berries and that the increased level of cytokinin activity in florets induced by the chemicals is causally associated with the promoted berry set.
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 10
Claim · model-written summary
Prebloom SADH spray on Kyoho clusters increased the set of seeded berries, as effectively as foliar treatment or shoot pinching.
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e1“The prebloom application of SADH (succinic acid-2, 2-dimethyl hydrazide) to clusters of Kyoho (V×L) by spraying at 2500 ppm was as effective for increasing the set of seeded berries as foliar treatment at the same concentration or prebloom shoot pinching”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying clusters without prebloom shoot inhibition had no inhibitory effect on shoot growth during bloom and set.
- Taxon
- Grapest0
- Organ / stage
- shoote2
- Treatment
- spraying on clustere2
- Outcome
- shoot growthe2
- Direction
- no inhibitory effecte2
- Qualifier
- during bloom and set stagese2
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e2“The spraying on cluster had no inhibitory effect on shoot growth during bloom and set stages”
Claim · model-written summary
CCC applied at 200 ppm to Muscat of Alexandria clusters gave nearly the same increase in berry set as seen with SADH.
- Taxon
- Grapest0
- Material
- Muscat of Alexandria (V)e3
- Treatment
- CCC (2-chloroethyl trimethylammonium chloride) was applied at 200 ppme3
- Outcome
- set of seeded berriese1
- Direction
- the same trend as abovee3
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e1“The prebloom application of SADH (succinic acid-2, 2-dimethyl hydrazide) to clusters of Kyoho (V×L) by spraying at 2500 ppm was as effective for increasing the set of seeded berries as foliar treatment at the same concentration or prebloom shoot pinching”
e3“Nearly the same trend as above was observed in Muscat of Alexandria (V) to which CCC (2-chloroethyl trimethylammonium chloride) was applied at 200 ppm”
Claim · model-written summary
Growth retardant applications to clusters or leaves distinctly reduced gibberellin activity in florets at the beginning of bloom.
- Taxon
- Grapest0
- Organ / stage
- floretse4
- Treatment
- the application of the growth retardants to either clusters or leavese4
- Outcome
- gibberellin activitye4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Qualifier
- at the beginning of bloome4
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e4“In both cultivars, the application of the growth retardants to either clusters or leaves distinctly reduced the gibberellin activity in florets at the beginning of bloom, whereas the shoot pinching raised the activity in Muscat or did not affect it in Kyoho”
Claim · model-written summary
Shoot pinching raised gibberellin activity in florets of Muscat of Alexandria.
- Taxon
- Grapest0
- Material
- Muscate4
- Organ / stage
- floretse4
- Treatment
- shoot pinchinge4
- Outcome
- gibberellin activitye4
- Direction
- raisede4
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e4“In both cultivars, the application of the growth retardants to either clusters or leaves distinctly reduced the gibberellin activity in florets at the beginning of bloom, whereas the shoot pinching raised the activity in Muscat or did not affect it in Kyoho”
Claim · model-written summary
Shoot pinching did not affect gibberellin activity in florets of Kyoho.
- Taxon
- Grapest0
- Material
- Kyohoe4
- Organ / stage
- floretse4
- Treatment
- shoot pinchinge4
- Outcome
- gibberellin activitye4
- Direction
- did not affecte4
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e4“In both cultivars, the application of the growth retardants to either clusters or leaves distinctly reduced the gibberellin activity in florets at the beginning of bloom, whereas the shoot pinching raised the activity in Muscat or did not affect it in Kyoho”
Claim · model-written summary
Retardant applications markedly enhanced cytokinin activity in florets in both cultivars.
- Taxon
- Grapest0
- Organ / stage
- floretse5
- Treatment
- retardant applicationse5
- Outcome
- cytokinin activitye5
- Direction
- markedly enhancede5
- Qualifier
- in both cultivarse5
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e5“the cytokinin activity in florets was markedly enhanced by the retardant applications and the shoot pinching in both cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Shoot pinching markedly enhanced cytokinin activity in florets in both cultivars.
- Taxon
- Grapest0
- Organ / stage
- floretse5
- Treatment
- shoot pinchinge5
- Outcome
- cytokinin activitye5
- Direction
- markedly enhancede5
- Qualifier
- in both cultivarse5
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e5“the cytokinin activity in florets was markedly enhanced by the retardant applications and the shoot pinching in both cultivars”
Claim · model-written summary
Reduction of shoot growth is not essential for growth retardants to promote the set of seeded berries.
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e6“These results indicate that reduction of shoot growth is not essential to exert the promotive effect of growth retardants on the set of seeded berries”
Claim · model-written summary
Increased cytokinin activity in florets induced by the chemicals is causally associated with the promoted berry set.
Verbatim
t0“Promotion of Berry Set in Grapes by Growth Retardants”
e7“the increased level of cytokinin activity in florets induced by the chemicals is causally associated with the promoted berry set”
The same questions in other papers
cluster · growth · VitisPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
2 papers more in this group
See all 6 papers →application · growth · VitisPositive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 37 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 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.