Paper · 2015 · Northern Horticulture

Effect of Cutting-off Frozen Branch on Physiological Metabolisn of‘Lyuling'Walnut After Frost

LI Mei-me

15
claims
50
verbatim quotes
0
citations
4
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Taking 10-year-old walnut trees of‘Lyuling'as materials,physiological metabolisn of cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch in 2013 were studied,in order to reduce frost damage of walnut trees.The results showed that,the budding rates of pruning on April 20 th and pruning on May 6th and CK were 69.05%,61.20% and 56.32%respectively,and that of two pruning treatments were significantly higher than the control,and that of pruning on April20 th was very significantly higher than pruning on May 6th;the fruit rates of these three treatments were 79.66%,71.55%and 63.31%respectively,and that of pruning on April 20 th was very significantly higher than the control;the average whole day sap flow velocities of these three treatments were 4.73cm/h,4.02cm/h and 2.52cm/h,respectively,and that of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest;net photosynthetic rates of these three treatments were 7.77μmol·m-2·s-1,7.39μmol·m-2·s-1,5.41μmol·m-2·s-1,respectively,and that of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest;chlorophyll a content of these three treatments were 1.83mg/g,1.76mg/g and 1.65mg/g,respectively,the chlorophyll(a+b)content of these three treatments were 2.56mg/g,2.49mg/g and 2.30mg/g;the leaf total nitrogen content of these three treatments was 2.4005%,2.2512% and 2.0533% respectively,the total potassium content of these three treatments was 1.6516%,1.4115%and 1.3076%,respectively,and both the total nitrogen content and potassium content of pruning on April 20 th were the biggest;the root activities of these three treatments were 196.04μg·g-1·h-1,184.76μg·g-1·h-1 and 162.89μg·g-1·h-1;the single fruit weight of these three treatments was 12.21 g,11.57 g and 10.53 g,respectively,and the yield per plant of these three treatments was 3.67 kg,2.99 kg and 2.03kg;the oil content of these three treatments was 65.49%,65.32% and 63.71%,and the total protein content of these three treatments was 20.60%,20.11%and 19.72%,respectively,and the soluble protein content of these three treatments was2.26%,2.23%and 2.17%,respectively,and all of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest.

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 15

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Budding rates were 69.05% (pruning April 20), 61.20% (pruning May 6) and 56.32% (control); both pruning treatments were significantly higher than the control.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
pruning on April 20 th and pruning on May 6the1
Outcome
budding ratese1
Direction
significantly highere1
Value
69.05%,61.20% and 56.32%e1
Comparator
controle1

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e1

“the budding rates of pruning on April 20 th and pruning on May 6th and CK were 69.05%,61.20% and 56.32%respectively,and that of two pruning treatments were significantly higher than the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 236–429 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Budding rate of pruning on April 20 was very significantly higher than that of pruning on May 6.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
pruning on April20 the2
Outcome
budding ratese1
Direction
very significantly highere2
Comparator
pruning on May 6the2

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e1

“the budding rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 236–253 · show in text ↑
e2

“that of pruning on April20 th was very significantly higher than pruning on May 6th”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 434–517 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit rates were 79.66%, 71.55% and 63.31% for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was very significantly higher than the control.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
pruning on April 20 the1
Outcome
fruit ratese1
Direction
very significantly highere1
Value
79.66%,71.55%and 63.31%e1
Comparator
controle1

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e1

“the fruit rates of these three treatments were 79.66%,71.55%and 63.31%respectively,and that of pruning on April 20 th was very significantly higher than the control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 518–682 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Average whole-day sap flow velocities were 4.73, 4.02 and 2.52 cm/h for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
pruning on April 20 the1
Outcome
average whole day sap flow velocitiese1
Direction
biggeste1
Value
4.73cm/h,4.02cm/h and 2.52cm/he1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the average whole day sap flow velocities of these three treatments were 4.73cm/h,4.02cm/h and 2.52cm/h,respectively,and that of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 683–850 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Net photosynthetic rates were 7.77, 7.39 and 5.41 μmol m-2 s-1 for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
pruning on April 20 the1
Outcome
net photosynthetic ratese1
Direction
biggeste1
Value
7.77μmol·m-2·s-1,7.39μmol·m-2·s-1,5.41μmol·m-2·s-1e1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“net photosynthetic rates of these three treatments were 7.77μmol·m-2·s-1,7.39μmol·m-2·s-1,5.41μmol·m-2·s-1,respectively,and that of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 851–1021 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorophyll a content was 1.83, 1.76 and 1.65 mg/g for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
chlorophyll a contente1
Direction
higherinferrede1
Value
1.83mg/g,1.76mg/g and 1.65mg/ge1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“chlorophyll a content of these three treatments were 1.83mg/g,1.76mg/g and 1.65mg/g,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1022–1118 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chlorophyll (a+b) content was 2.56, 2.49 and 2.30 mg/g for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
chlorophyll(a+b)contente1
Direction
higherinferrede1
Value
2.56mg/g,2.49mg/g and 2.30mg/ge1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the chlorophyll(a+b)content of these three treatments were 2.56mg/g,2.49mg/g and 2.30mg/g”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1119–1208 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf total nitrogen content was 2.4005%, 2.2512% and 2.0533% for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
pruning on April 20 the2
Outcome
leaf total nitrogen contente1
Direction
biggeste2
Value
2.4005%,2.2512% and 2.0533%e1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the leaf total nitrogen content of these three treatments was 2.4005%,2.2512% and 2.0533% respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1209–1311 · show in text ↑
e2

“both the total nitrogen content and potassium content of pruning on April 20 th were the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1414–1510 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Leaf total potassium content was 1.6516%, 1.4115% and 1.3076% for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
pruning on April 20 the2
Outcome
total potassium contente1
Direction
biggeste2
Value
1.6516%,1.4115%and 1.3076%e1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the total potassium content of these three treatments was 1.6516%,1.4115%and 1.3076%,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1312–1409 · show in text ↑
e2

“both the total nitrogen content and potassium content of pruning on April 20 th were the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1414–1510 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Root activities were 196.04, 184.76 and 162.89 μg g-1 h-1 for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
root activitiese1
Direction
higherinferrede1
Value
196.04μg·g-1·h-1,184.76μg·g-1·h-1 and 162.89μg·g-1·h-1e1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the root activities of these three treatments were 196.04μg·g-1·h-1,184.76μg·g-1·h-1 and 162.89μg·g-1·h-1”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1511–1616 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Single fruit weight was 12.21, 11.57 and 10.53 g for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
single fruit weighte1
Direction
biggeste4
Value
12.21 g,11.57 g and 10.53 ge1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the single fruit weight of these three treatments was 12.21 g,11.57 g and 10.53 g,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1617–1711 · show in text ↑
e4

“all of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2060–2105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Yield per plant was 3.67, 2.99 and 2.03 kg for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
yield per plante1
Direction
biggeste4
Value
3.67 kg,2.99 kg and 2.03kge1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the yield per plant of these three treatments was 3.67 kg,2.99 kg and 2.03kg”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1716–1792 · show in text ↑
e4

“all of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2060–2105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Oil content was 65.49%, 65.32% and 63.71% for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
oil contente1
Direction
biggeste4
Value
65.49%,65.32% and 63.71%e1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the oil content of these three treatments was 65.49%,65.32% and 63.71%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1793–1863 · show in text ↑
e4

“all of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2060–2105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Total protein content was 20.60%, 20.11% and 19.72% for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
total protein contente1
Direction
biggeste4
Value
20.60%,20.11%and 19.72%e1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the total protein content of these three treatments was 20.60%,20.11%and 19.72%,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1868–1960 · show in text ↑
e4

“all of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2060–2105 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soluble protein content was 2.26%, 2.23% and 2.17% for pruning April 20, pruning May 6 and control; April 20 pruning was the biggest.

Taxon
walnute0
Treatment
cutting off frozen branche3
Outcome
soluble protein contente1
Direction
biggeste4
Value
2.26%,2.23%and 2.17%e1
Comparator
no cutting off frozen branche3

Verbatim

e0

“10-year-old walnut trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 7–31 · show in text ↑
e3

“cutting off frozen branch and no cutting off frozen branch”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 84–142 · show in text ↑
e1

“the soluble protein content of these three treatments was2.26%,2.23%and 2.17%,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1965–2055 · show in text ↑
e4

“all of pruning on April 20 th was the biggest”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2060–2105 · show in text ↑

pruning · physiology: photosynthesis · Juglans (walnuts)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

pruning · quality: protein · Juglans (walnuts)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

pruning · quality: oil · Juglans (walnuts)Results agree

2 papers: 2 positive, 0 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
See all 2 papers →

pruning · yield · Juglans (walnuts)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.