Abstract
Fruit size is a very important quality attribute in cherry trees. Appropriate canopy and crop load management are, therefore, required to obtain an adequate balance between the yield and fruit size. A study was carried out during the 2007-2008 season in the Maule Region of Chile to evaluate the effect of increasing levels of dormant pruning (Control, no removal; Soft pruning, 15% removal; Moderate pruning, 30% removal and Intense pruning, removal of 50% of the fruiting wood) on the fruit yield, quality (size, fruit weight, soluble solids and fruit firmness) and crop value of sweet cherries (Prunus avium L.) cv. 'Bing' on the dwarfing rootstock, 'Gisela 6'. Treatments at the 30 and 50% removal intensities had a strong effect on yield reduction (36.1% and 67% decreases, respectively). The fruit size distribution, firmness and soluble solids were positively affected by the removal treatments. The amount of fruit with no fresh market quality (< 22 mm) was reduced by the pruning (15% of the fruit of the control represented this category). Treatment at the 15% removal intensity had a strong effect in reducing the amount of small fruit to very low levels (2% of the total fruit) and promoting the yield of premium fruit (diameter > 28 mm) (52% of the total fruit) without affecting the total yield (kg fruit per tree). The crop value was improved in the cases of soft (212.7%) and moderate (140.4%) dormant pruning. Soft dormant pruning emerges as a practical approach for improving the yield, quality, fruit size distribution and crop value in this rootstock-variety combination, but long-term studies should be carried out to assess any carryover effects on the yield and, especially, the crop load balance.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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
Moderate pruning at 30% removal reduced yield by 36.1%.
- Taxon
- sweet cherries (Prunus avium)
Prunus aviumt0 - Treatment
- 30e0
- Outcome
- yielde0
- Direction
- reductione0
- Value
- 36.1%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatments at the 30 and 50% removal intensities had a strong effect on yield reduction (36.1% and 67% decreases, respectively)”
t0“sweet cherries (Prunus avium)”
Claim · model-written summary
Intense pruning at 50% removal reduced yield by 67%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatments at the 30 and 50% removal intensities had a strong effect on yield reduction (36.1% and 67% decreases, respectively)”
t0“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
Pruning positively affected fruit size distribution, firmness, and soluble solids.
- Taxon
- sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
- Treatment
- removal treatmentse0
- Outcome
- fruit size distribution, firmness and soluble solidse0
- Direction
- positively affectede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The fruit size distribution, firmness and soluble solids were positively affected by the removal treatments”
t0“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
Pruning reduced fruit below fresh market size; 15% of control fruit were in that category.
- Taxon
- sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
- Treatment
- pruninge0
- Outcome
- amount of fruit with no fresh market qualitye0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Qualifier
- 15% of the fruit of the controle0
- Comparator
- controle0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The amount of fruit with no fresh market quality (< 22 mm) was reduced by the pruning (15% of the fruit of the control represented this category)”
t0“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
Soft pruning reduced small fruit to 2% of total fruit.
- Taxon
- sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
- Treatment
- 15% removal intensitye0
- Outcome
- amount of small fruite0
- Direction
- reducinge0
- Value
- 2% of the total fruite0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Treatment at the 15% removal intensity had a strong effect in reducing the amount of small fruit to very low levels (2% of the total fruit)”
t0“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
Soft pruning promoted premium fruit yield to 52% of total fruit.
- Taxon
- sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt1
- Treatment
- Soft dormant pruningt0
- Outcome
- yield of premium fruite0
- Direction
- promotinge0
- Value
- 52% of the total fruite0
- Qualifier
- diameter > 28 mme0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“promoting the yield of premium fruit (diameter > 28 mm) (52% of the total fruit)”
t0“Soft dormant pruning emerges as a practical approach”
t1“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
Soft pruning did not affect total fruit yield per tree.
- Taxon
- sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt1
- Treatment
- Soft dormant pruningt0
- Outcome
- total yield (kg fruit per tree)e0
- Direction
- without affectinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“without affecting the total yield (kg fruit per tree)”
t0“Soft dormant pruning emerges as a practical approach”
t1“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
Soft pruning improved crop value by 212.7%.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The crop value was improved in the cases of soft (212.7%) and moderate (140.4%) dormant pruning”
t0“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
Moderate pruning improved crop value by 140.4%.
- Taxon
- sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
- Treatment
- moderatee0
- Outcome
- crop valuee0
- Direction
- improvede0
- Value
- 140.4%e0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The crop value was improved in the cases of soft (212.7%) and moderate (140.4%) dormant pruning”
t0“sweet cherries”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend soft dormant pruning to improve yield, quality, fruit size distribution and crop value in this rootstock-variety combination, pending longer studies.
- Taxon
- sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
- Treatment
- Soft dormant pruninge0
- Outcome
- improving the yield, quality, fruit size distribution and crop valuee0
- Qualifier
- long-term studies should be carried out to assess any carryover effects on the yield and, especially, the crop load balancee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soft dormant pruning emerges as a practical approach for improving the yield, quality, fruit size distribution and crop value in this rootstock-variety combination, but long-term studies should be carried out to assess any carryover effects on the yield and, especially, the crop load balance”
t0“sweet cherries”
The same questions in other papers
pruning · yield · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Results differ
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- negative
17 papers more in this group
See all 21 papers →pruning · quality: general · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
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.