Abstract
The aim of the study was to examine the efficiency of foliar zinc (Zn) application in pear culture. The experiment was carried out in 2005-2007 in a commercial orchard in central Poland, on 6-8 year-old cv. Lukasovka pear trees, grown on coarse-textured soil, moderately abundant in organic matter or available Zn and slightly acidic in reaction. The trees were sprayed with Zn as EDTA in three periods: (1) before bloom: at the stage of bud break, and green and white bud, at a rate of 80 g Zn ha -1 in each spray treatment; (2) after bloom: at petal fall, and 14 and 21 days after full bloom, at a rate of 50 g Zn ha-1 per spray or; (3) after harvest, 3-4 weeks before natural leaf fall, at a rate of 200 g Zn ha-1. Trees unsprayed with Zn served as the control. The results showed, that pre-bloom Zn sprays increased status of this micronutrient in flowers, and post-bloom Zn sprays – in leaves and fruits. However, foliar Zn sprays had no effect on tree vigor, set of flowers and fruitlets, yielding, mean fruit weight, fruit russeting, and content of organic acids and soluble solids in fruit flesh. It is concluded that foliar Zn sprays of pear trees with an optimal leaf Zn status (according to the current threshold values) are not successful in improving plant growth, yielding, and fruit quality.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Pre-bloom zinc sprays increased zinc status in pear flowers.
- Taxon
- pear trees
_Poirier_Fleurs_et_feuilles.jpg?width=60)
Pyrus communist0 - Organ / stage
- flowerse0
- Treatment
- pre-bloom Zn sprayse0
- Outcome
- status of this micronutrient in flowerse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Comparator
- Trees unsprayed with Zne1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
_Poirier_Fleurs_et_feuilles.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“pre-bloom Zn sprays increased status of this micronutrient in flowers”
t0“pear trees”
e1“Trees unsprayed with Zn served as the control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Post-bloom zinc sprays increased zinc status in leaves and fruits.
- Taxon
- pear treesPyrus communist0
- Treatment
- post-bloom Zn sprayse0
- Outcome
- leaves and fruitse0
- Direction
- increasede1
- Comparator
- Trees unsprayed with Zne2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“post-bloom Zn sprays – in leaves and fruits”
e1“pre-bloom Zn sprays increased status of this micronutrient in flowers”
t0“pear trees”
e2“Trees unsprayed with Zn served as the control.”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar zinc sprays did not affect tree vigor, flower and fruitlet set, or yield.
- Taxon
- pear treesPyrus communist0
- Treatment
- foliar Zn sprayse0
- Outcome
- tree vigor, set of flowers and fruitlets, yieldinge0
- Direction
- no effecte0
- Comparator
- Trees unsprayed with Zne1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“foliar Zn sprays had no effect on tree vigor, set of flowers and fruitlets, yielding”
e1“Trees unsprayed with Zn served as the control.”
t0“pear trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar zinc sprays did not affect fruit weight, russeting, organic acids, or soluble solids.
- Taxon
- pear treesPyrus communist0
- Treatment
- foliar Zn sprayse0
- Outcome
- mean fruit weight, fruit russeting, and content of organic acids and soluble solids in fruit fleshe0
- Direction
- no effecte0
- Comparator
- Trees unsprayed with Zne1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“foliar Zn sprays had no effect on tree vigor, set of flowers and fruitlets, yielding, mean fruit weight, fruit russeting, and content of organic acids and soluble solids in fruit flesh”
e1“Trees unsprayed with Zn served as the control.”
t0“pear trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar zinc sprays are judged unsuccessful for pear trees with optimal leaf zinc status.
- Taxon
- pear treesPyrus communise0
- Treatment
- foliar Zn sprayse0
- Outcome
- not successful in improving plant growth, yielding, and fruit qualitye0
- Qualifier
- optimal leaf Zn statuse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“foliar Zn sprays of pear trees with an optimal leaf Zn status (according to the current threshold values) are not successful in improving plant growth, yielding, and fruit quality.”
The same questions in other papers
zinc atom · yield · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results
1 in the opposite direction
- positive
application · phenology · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →application · quality: sugar starch · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →application · yield · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
27 papers more in this group
See all 31 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.