Abstract
ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS. Poncirus trifoliata, Malabar soil series, orchard design, planting density ‘Hamlin’ orange trees on Flying Dragon trifoliate orange [Poncirus trifoliata (L.) Raf.], Changsha mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco), or a citrange {Koethen sweet orange [C. sinensis (L.) Osb.) x Rubidoux trifoliate orange]} rootstock were planted in a commercial site of Malabar series soil near Indiantown, FL, in Apr. 1982. The split plot trial was planted on double-row beds with 21.5 ft between rows and in-row spacings of 7.5, 10, and 12.5 ft. In-row spacing did not affect tree survival, which was about 85% after 21 years. Tree losses were mostly from citrus blight. The trees on Flying Dragon were smaller (<7 ft) at age 10 years than those on the other rootstocks, which were 8.5 to 9.0 feet tall. Plant height increased as the distance among trees in the row increased, but the differences were small. The trees on Flying Dragon had about 6.8 boxes/tree at age 12 years in cumulative yield over four seasons between 1990 and 1994 regardless of spacing. The Flying Dragon cumulative yield extrapolates to 67% higher productivity for a hypothetical acre of trees at 7.5 ft in-row spacing vs. 12.5 ft. The cumulative yields/tree across the three spacings for those on the other rootstocks were 10.3 boxes for Changsha and 9.4 for K x R citrange; however, cumulative yields increased to 11.5 and 10.7 boxes, respectively, at the 12.5-ft spacing. Mean juice quality measured in four seasons was about 6 pounds-solids/box. An economic interpretation showed that when tree vigor was properly matched with spacing and site conditions, closely or moderately spaced trees have the potential to be profi table.
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 12
Claim · model-written summary
In-row spacing did not affect survival, about 85% after 21 years.
- Taxon
- orange treest0
- Treatment
- In-row spacinge0
- Outcome
- tree survivale0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
- Value
- 85%e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“In-row spacing did not affect tree survival, which was about 85% after 21 years.”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Most tree losses were attributed to citrus blight.
Verbatim
e0“Tree losses were mostly from citrus blight.”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Flying Dragon trees were shorter at age 10 than trees on the other rootstocks.
Verbatim
e0“The trees on Flying Dragon were smaller (<7 ft) at age 10 years than those on the other rootstocks, which were 8.5 to 9.0 feet tall.”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Tree height rose slightly as spacing increased.
Verbatim
e0“Plant height increased as the distance among trees in the row increased, but the differences were small.”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Flying Dragon trees yielded about 6.8 boxes per tree cumulatively across four seasons regardless of spacing.
Verbatim
e0“The trees on Flying Dragon had about 6.8 boxes/tree at age 12 years in cumulative yield over four seasons between 1990 and 1994 regardless of spacing.”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Extrapolated Flying Dragon productivity at 7.5 ft spacing was 67% higher than at 12.5 ft.
Verbatim
e0“The Flying Dragon cumulative yield extrapolates to 67% higher productivity for a hypothetical acre of trees at 7.5 ft in-row spacing vs. 12.5 ft.”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Across spacings Changsha cumulative yield was 10.3 boxes per tree.
Verbatim
e0“The cumulative yields/tree across the three spacings for those on the other rootstocks were 10.3 boxes for Changsha and 9.4 for K x R citrange”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Across spacings K x R citrange cumulative yield was 9.4 boxes per tree.
Verbatim
e0“The cumulative yields/tree across the three spacings for those on the other rootstocks were 10.3 boxes for Changsha and 9.4 for K x R citrange”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
At 12.5 ft spacing Changsha cumulative yield reached 11.5 boxes.
- Taxon
- orange treest0
- Treatment
- 12.5-ft spacinge0
- Outcome
- cumulative yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 11.5e0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“cumulative yields increased to 11.5 and 10.7 boxes, respectively, at the 12.5-ft spacing”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
At 12.5 ft spacing K x R cumulative yield reached 10.7 boxes.
- Taxon
- orange treest0
- Treatment
- 12.5-ft spacinge0
- Outcome
- cumulative yieldse0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 10.7 boxese0
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“cumulative yields increased to 11.5 and 10.7 boxes, respectively, at the 12.5-ft spacing”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
Mean juice quality was about 6 pounds-solids per box over four seasons.
Verbatim
e0“Mean juice quality measured in four seasons was about 6 pounds-solids/box.”
t0“Orange Trees”
Claim · model-written summary
An economic interpretation found that suitable vigor, spacing and site conditions could make close or moderate spacing profitable.
Verbatim
e0“when tree vigor was properly matched with spacing and site conditions, closely or moderately spaced trees have the potential to be profi table”
t0“Orange Trees”
The same questions in other papers
density · yield · Citrus sinensis (sweet orange)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- 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.