Paper · 2007 · HortScience

The Effect of Prohexadione-calcium on Fruit Set and Chemical Thinning of Apple Trees

Duane W. Greene

5
claims
11
verbatim quotes
21
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Prohexadione-calcium (ProCa) has emerged as one of the most important management tools that an orchardist has available to control vegetative growth and to reduce the incidence and severity of fire blight. It has also been implicated in increased fruit set on treated apple trees. This investigation was initiated to confirm the effects of ProCa on fruit set and to evaluate different thinning strategies that might be used to appropriately thin treated trees. ProCa increased fruit set when applied at petal fall at initial rates of 125 or 250 mg·L −1 in three of the four experiments described in this article. Thinners were applied before, at the time of, and after application of ProCa. In all experiments, chemical thinners did not reduce fruit set to the same crop load level on ProCa-treated trees as they did on untreated trees. It was concluded that a different and more aggressive chemical thinning strategy must be used on trees that were treated with ProCa. Fruit size was reduced on ProCa-treated trees. This reduction was usually, but not always, related to increased fruit set. ProCa increased the number of pygmy fruit on ‘Delicious’ apple trees.

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

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ProCa applied at petal fall at 125 or 250 mg·L −1 increased fruit set in three of four experiments.

Taxon
apple treesMalus domesticat0
Treatment
applied at petal fall at initial rates of 125 or 250 mg·L −1e1
Outcome
fruit sete1
Direction
increasede1
Qualifier
in three of the four experimentse1

Not reportedComparator

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Apple Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–84 · show in text ↑
e1

“ProCa increased fruit set when applied at petal fall at initial rates of 125 or 250 mg·L −1 in three of the four experiments described in this article”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 461–611 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chemical thinners did not reduce fruit set to the same crop load level on ProCa-treated apple trees as on untreated trees.

Taxon
apple treesMalus domesticat0
Treatment
chemical thinnerse2
Outcome
fruit set to the same crop load levele2
Direction
did not reducee2
Comparator
untreated treese2

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Apple Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–84 · show in text ↑
e2

“In all experiments, chemical thinners did not reduce fruit set to the same crop load level on ProCa-treated trees as they did on untreated trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 691–835 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

ProCa-treated apple trees require a different and more aggressive chemical thinning strategy.

Taxon
apple treesMalus domesticat0
Treatment
ProCae3
Outcome
different and more aggressive chemical thinning strategye3

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Apple Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–84 · show in text ↑
e3

“It was concluded that a different and more aggressive chemical thinning strategy must be used on trees that were treated with ProCa”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 837–968 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit size was reduced on ProCa-treated apple trees, usually but not always related to increased fruit set.

Taxon
apple treesMalus domesticat0
Treatment
ProCae4
Outcome
Fruit sizee4
Direction
reducede4
Qualifier
usually, but not always, related to increased fruit sete5

Not reportedComparator

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Apple Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–84 · show in text ↑
e4

“Fruit size was reduced on ProCa-treated trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 970–1015 · show in text ↑
e5

“This reduction was usually, but not always, related to increased fruit set”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1091 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ProCa increased the number of pygmy fruit on Delicious apple trees.

Taxon
apple treesMalus domesticae6
Material
Deliciouse6
Treatment
ProCae6
Outcome
number of pygmy fruite6
Direction
increasede6

Not reportedComparator

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Apple Trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 73–84 · show in text ↑
e6

“ProCa increased the number of pygmy fruit on ‘Delicious’ apple trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1093–1161 · show in text ↑

prohexadione-calcium · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

10 papers: 4 positive, 6 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 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.