Paper · 1995 · HortScience

Calcium Sprays and Timing Affect Fruit Calcium Concentrations, Yield, Fruit Weight, and Cork Spot of `Anjou' Pears

J.T. Raese; S.R. Drake

8
claims
14
verbatim quotes
23
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Calcium sprays (CaCl 2 , Mora-Leaf-Ca + Link Ca, or Stopit) increased fruit Ca concentrations and reduced the incidence of cork spot of `Anjou' pears ( Pyrus communis L.) during four seasons. All Ca sprays increased yield relative to the control. All sprays resulted in some injury to leaves and fruit, but fruit was acceptable for marketing. At the low rate, Stopit sprays were the least injurious. Early season sprays, in June to July, produced less leaf and fruit injury than late-season sprays, in July to August, or early + late-season sprays. Early or late-season Ca sprays resulted in slightly larger fruit than early + late sprays. Either late or early + late-season sprays led to higher Ca concentrations in fruit cortex than early sprays.

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 8

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium sprays increased fruit calcium concentration in Anjou pears.

Taxon
Pyrus communis L.Pyrus communise0
Material
`Anjou'e0
Treatment
Calcium sprayse0
Outcome
fruit Ca concentrationse0
Direction
increasede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Calcium sprays (CaCl 2 , Mora-Leaf-Ca + Link Ca, or Stopit) increased fruit Ca concentrations and reduced the incidence of cork spot of `Anjou' pears ( Pyrus communis L.) during four seasons.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–191 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium sprays reduced cork spot incidence in Anjou pears.

Taxon
Pyrus communis L.Pyrus communise0
Material
`Anjou'e0
Treatment
Calcium sprayse0
Outcome
incidence of cork spote0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Calcium sprays (CaCl 2 , Mora-Leaf-Ca + Link Ca, or Stopit) increased fruit Ca concentrations and reduced the incidence of cork spot of `Anjou' pears ( Pyrus communis L.) during four seasons.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–191 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All calcium sprays increased pear yield relative to the control.

Taxon
PearsPyrust0
Treatment
Ca sprayse0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
increasede0
Comparator
the controle0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus
Pyrus · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)JLPC · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“All Ca sprays increased yield relative to the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 192–246 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pears”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 109–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

All calcium sprays caused some leaf and fruit injury, although fruit remained marketable.

Taxon
PearsPyrust0
Treatment
All sprayse0
Outcome
injury to leaves and fruite0
Direction
some injurye0
Qualifier
fruit was acceptable for marketinge0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus
Pyrus · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)JLPC · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“All sprays resulted in some injury to leaves and fruit, but fruit was acceptable for marketing.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 247–342 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pears”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 109–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At the low rate, Stopit sprays were least injurious.

Taxon
PearsPyrust0
Treatment
Stopit sprayse0
Outcome
least injuriouse0
Direction
least injuriouse0
Qualifier
At the low ratee0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus
Pyrus · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)JLPC · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“At the low rate, Stopit sprays were the least injurious.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 343–399 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pears”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 109–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Early sprays produced less leaf and fruit injury than late or combined early and late sprays.

Taxon
PearsPyrust0
Treatment
Early season sprayse0
Outcome
leaf and fruit injurye0
Direction
lesse0
Qualifier
early + late-season sprayse0
Comparator
late-season sprayse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus
Pyrus · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)JLPC · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Early season sprays, in June to July, produced less leaf and fruit injury than late-season sprays, in July to August, or early + late-season sprays.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 400–548 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pears”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 109–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Early or late sprays produced slightly larger fruit than combined early and late sprays.

Taxon
PearsPyrust0
Treatment
Early or late-season Ca sprayse0
Outcome
fruite0
Direction
slightly largere0
Comparator
early + late sprayse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus
Pyrus · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)JLPC · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Early or late-season Ca sprays resulted in slightly larger fruit than early + late sprays.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 549–639 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pears”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 109–114 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Late or combined early and late sprays led to higher fruit cortex calcium than early sprays.

Taxon
PearsPyrust0
Treatment
late or early + late-season sprayse0
Outcome
Ca concentrations in fruit cortexe0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
early sprayse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Pyrus
Pyrus · Taxon · picture of the genus (one of its species)JLPC · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Either late or early + late-season sprays led to higher Ca concentrations in fruit cortex than early sprays.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 640–748 · show in text ↑
t0

“Pears”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 109–114 · show in text ↑

calcium atom · disease · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 5 positive, 1 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. negative
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

calcium atom · nutrient: content · Pyrus communis (pear)Results 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 →

application · crop injury · Pyrus (pears)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 2 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

application · nutrient: content · Pyrus (pears)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

application · disease · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results

18 papers: 15 positive, 3 negative or no effect

14 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

14 papers more in this group

See all 18 papers →

application · nutrient: content · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results

29 papers: 27 positive, 2 negative or no effect

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

25 papers more in this group

See all 29 papers →

application · yield · Pyrus (pears)Results agree

5 papers: 5 positive, 0 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

1 paper more in this group

See all 5 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.