Paper · 1993 · HortScience

RAPID GRAFT PROPAGATION OF GRAPE ROOTSTOCKS IN TEXAS

George Ray McEachern; Bryan G. Roth

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
0
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Dormant adult hardwood cutting of Vitis candicans (VC) grapes were grafted, callused and grown in 1990, 91, and 92 at College Station, TX. Four indole-3-butyric acid (IBA) treatments were evaluated with all four promoting callus and root formation significantly over a no IBA control. Nine callus treatments were evaluated with Outdoor Moist Sand being significantly superior. Ten VC seedlings from throughout Texas were compared, Smith Mustang being significantly superior.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Four IBA treatments significantly promoted callus formation over no IBA.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
indole-3-butyric acid (IBA) treatmentse0
Outcome
calluse0
Direction
promotinge0
Comparator
no IBA controle0

Verbatim

e0

“Four indole-3-butyric acid (IBA) treatments were evaluated with all four promoting callus and root formation significantly over a no IBA control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 139–283 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE ROOTSTOCKS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–43 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Four IBA treatments significantly promoted root formation over no IBA.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
indole-3-butyric acid (IBA) treatmentse0
Outcome
root formatione0
Direction
promotinge0
Comparator
no IBA controle0

Verbatim

e0

“Four indole-3-butyric acid (IBA) treatments were evaluated with all four promoting callus and root formation significantly over a no IBA control”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 139–283 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE ROOTSTOCKS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–43 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Outdoor Moist Sand was significantly superior among callus treatments.

Taxon
GRAPEt0
Treatment
Outdoor Moist Sande0
Outcome
superiore0
Direction
superiore0
Comparator
callus treatmentse0

Verbatim

e0

“Nine callus treatments were evaluated with Outdoor Moist Sand being significantly superior”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 285–375 · show in text ↑
t0

“GRAPE ROOTSTOCKS”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 27–43 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Smith Mustang was significantly superior among the compared seedlings.

Taxon
Vitis candicansVitis mustangensise1
Material
Smith Mustange0
Outcome
significantly superiore0
Direction
superiore0
Comparator
VC seedlingse0
Setting
Texase0

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

Vitis mustangensis
Vitis mustangensis · TaxonDdal · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Ten VC seedlings from throughout Texas were compared, Smith Mustang being significantly superior”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 377–473 · show in text ↑
e1

“Dormant adult hardwood cutting of Vitis candicans (VC) grapes were grafted, callused and grown in 1990, 91, and 92 at College Station, TX”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–137 · show in text ↑

indole-3-butyric acid · growth · VitisResults differ

34 papers: 33 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

30 papers more in this group

See all 34 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.