Abstract
Apples of three spur McIntosh strains were compared with standard McIntosh for three consecutive seasons. No differences in stem-associated defects were found except flat stem cavities which occurred more frequently in the spur strains in two of the three years. Apples from spur strains were more elongate but equally as uniform in shape, and were also larger. The larger fruit may explain why both firmness and soluble solids were lower in the spur strains. Differences among the four strains were smaller than differences in strains from one year to the next.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Stem-associated defects did not differ between spur and standard McIntosh apples overall.
Verbatim
e0“No differences in stem-associated defects were found except flat stem cavities which occurred more frequently in the spur strains in two of the three years.”
t0“APPLES”
Claim · model-written summary
Flat stem cavities occurred more often in spur strains in two of three years.
Verbatim
e0“flat stem cavities which occurred more frequently in the spur strains in two of the three years.”
t0“APPLES”
Claim · model-written summary
Apples from spur strains were more elongate.
- Taxon
- Apples
Malus domesticae0 - Material
- spur strainse0
- Outcome
- elongatee0
- Direction
- more elongatee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Apples from spur strains were more elongate but equally as uniform in shape, and were also larger.”
Claim · model-written summary
Apples from spur strains were equally uniform in shape.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticae0
- Material
- spur strainse0
- Outcome
- uniform in shapee0
- Direction
- equallye0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Apples from spur strains were more elongate but equally as uniform in shape, and were also larger.”
Claim · model-written summary
Apples from spur strains were larger.
- Taxon
- ApplesMalus domesticae0
- Material
- spur strainse0
- Outcome
- largere0
- Direction
- largere0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Apples from spur strains were more elongate but equally as uniform in shape, and were also larger.”
Claim · model-written summary
Firmness was lower in spur strain apples.
Verbatim
e0“The larger fruit may explain why both firmness and soluble solids were lower in the spur strains.”
t0“APPLES”
Claim · model-written summary
Soluble solids were lower in spur strain apples.
Verbatim
e0“The larger fruit may explain why both firmness and soluble solids were lower in the spur strains.”
t0“APPLES”
Claim · model-written summary
Larger fruit may explain the lower firmness and soluble solids in spur strains.
Verbatim
e0“The larger fruit may explain why both firmness and soluble solids were lower in the spur strains.”
t0“APPLES”
Claim · model-written summary
Between-strain differences were smaller than year-to-year differences within strains.
Verbatim
e0“Differences among the four strains were smaller than differences in strains from one year to the next.”
t0“APPLES”