Abstract
Abstract Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity. Shading spurs reduced spur leaf photosynthesis (Pn) and transpiration (Tr), but shading shoots had no effect on spur leaf Pn. There was no difference between fruiting and nonfruiting spur Pn and Tr. Shading shoots reduced fruit growth and delayed maturity, but shading spurs had no effect on either. Fruiting reduced—but did not eliminate—spur flowering the following year. Light conditions late in the season had no effect on flowering or spur leaf development the following spring.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Shading spurs reduced spur leaf photosynthesis and transpiration.
- Taxon
- apple
Malus domesticae0 - Material
- Starkrimson Deliciouse0
- Organ / stage
- spur leafe1
- Treatment
- Shading spurse1
- Outcome
- spur leaf photosynthesis (Pn) and transpiration (Tr)e1
- Direction
- reducede1
- Comparator
- lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e1“Shading spurs reduced spur leaf photosynthesis (Pn) and transpiration (Tr), but shading shoots had no effect on spur leaf Pn”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading shoots had no effect on spur leaf photosynthesis.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Organ / stage
- spur leafe1
- Treatment
- shading shootse1
- Outcome
- spur leaf Pne1
- Direction
- no effecte1
- Comparator
- lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e1“Shading spurs reduced spur leaf photosynthesis (Pn) and transpiration (Tr), but shading shoots had no effect on spur leaf Pn”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruiting did not change spur photosynthesis or transpiration relative to nonfruiting spurs.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- Fruitinge2
- Outcome
- spur Pn and Tre2
- Direction
- no differencee2
- Comparator
- nonfruiting spure2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e2“There was no difference between fruiting and nonfruiting spur Pn and Tr”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading shoots reduced fruit growth.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- Shading shootse3
- Outcome
- fruit growthe3
- Direction
- reducede3
- Comparator
- lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e3“Shading shoots reduced fruit growth and delayed maturity, but shading spurs had no effect on either”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading shoots delayed fruit maturity.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- Shading shootse3
- Outcome
- maturitye3
- Direction
- delayede3
- Comparator
- lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e3“Shading shoots reduced fruit growth and delayed maturity, but shading spurs had no effect on either”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading spurs had no effect on fruit growth.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- shading spurse3
- Outcome
- fruit growthe3
- Direction
- no effecte3
- Comparator
- lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e3“Shading shoots reduced fruit growth and delayed maturity, but shading spurs had no effect on either”
Claim · model-written summary
Shading spurs had no effect on fruit maturity.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- shading spurse3
- Outcome
- maturitye3
- Direction
- no effecte3
- Comparator
- lighte0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e3“Shading shoots reduced fruit growth and delayed maturity, but shading spurs had no effect on either”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruiting reduced spur flowering the following year but did not eliminate it.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Treatment
- Fruitinge4
- Outcome
- spur flowering the following yeare4
- Direction
- reducede4
- Qualifier
- did not eliminatee4
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e4“Fruiting reduced—but did not eliminate—spur flowering the following year”
Claim · model-written summary
Late-season light conditions had no effect on flowering or spur leaf development the following spring.
- Taxon
- appleMalus domesticae0
- Organ / stage
- spur leafe5
- Treatment
- Light conditions late in the seasone5
- Outcome
- flowering or spur leaf developmente5
- Direction
- no effecte5
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Leaves of spurs and/or shoots of small fruiting ‘Starkrimson Delicious’ apple trees were exposed to light or shade treatments from 60 days after petal fall until fruit maturity”
e5“Light conditions late in the season had no effect on flowering or spur leaf development the following spring”
The same questions in other papers
shade · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- negative
13 papers more in this group
See all 17 papers →shade · physiology: photosynthesis · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →climate site · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- negative
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →light · growth · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 20 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
28 papers more in this group
See all 32 papers →shade · phenology · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
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.