Paper · 2000 · HortScience

116 Preharvest Fruit Drop Studies, Harvest Quality, and Cold Storage of `Golden Delicious' and `Rome' Apples

R.E. Byers; D.H. Carbaugh; L.D. Combs

17
claims
34
verbatim quotes
4
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Combinations of aminoethoxyvinylglycine (AVG, ReTain) and NAA gave better control of fruit drop of `Golden Delicious' than either alone. When the full rate of ReTain (50 g/A) was compared to a reduced rate of ReTain (86 g/ha) plus NAA, equivalent control of fruit drop of `Golden Delicious' resulted. ReTain delayed softening and starch depletion of `Golden Delicious' fruit. NAA in some cases promoted earlier fruit maturity; but when used in combination with ReTain, maturity was similar to ReTain-treated fruit. Fruit with the highest firmness and starch came out of cold storage in the best condition. Neither 1-methylcyclopropene (MCP, EthylBloc) or NAA inhibited fruit drop of `Golden Delicious' fruit when applied at harvest; but previous ReTain and NAA data indicate that late applications are frequently much less effective than if applied 4 weeks before harvest. Ethephon spray treatments caused more rapid and extensive fruit drop than the control. Trees gassed or sprayed with EthylBloc before ethephon sprays also dropped rapidly. `Golden Delicious' fruit on the tree were dramatically maintained firmer by the EthylBloc gas, and to a lesser extent by EthylBloc sprays by 19.1 N and 10.2 N firmness, respectively, tested on 28 Oct. Starch was maintained by the EthylBloc gas, but not by the sprays. These data indicated that EthylBloc applied as a gas or spray did have a physiological affect but did not control fruit drop. Fruit diameter, soluble solids and color did not appear to be affected. Further study of earlier applications of EthylBloc or combinations with fruit drop control agents may be needed to get fruit drop control. NAA plus Silwet L-77 inhibited fruit drop of `Law Rome', but none of the EthylBloc sprays inhibited fruit drop when applied at harvest. Previous data with ReTain and NAA indicated that late applications are frequently much less effective than if applied 4 weeks before harvest. EthylBloc sprays applied 21 Oct. dramatically maintained fruit firmness tested on 3 Nov. Starch was not maintained by the EthylBloc gas, but starch had almost disappeared by the application time on 21 Oct. Fruit diameter, soluble solids, and color did not appear to be affected. Further study of earlier applications of EthylBloc may be needed to demonstrate fruit drop control. Shading trees with 92% polypropylene shade material for 3 or 7 days caused more rapid fruit abscission at 7 days than 3 days and both were greater than the control.

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 17

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

AVG and NAA together improved Golden Delicious fruit-drop control over either alone.

Material
`Golden Delicious'e0
Treatment
Combinations of aminoethoxyvinylglycine (AVG, ReTain) and NAAe0
Outcome
control of fruit drope0
Direction
bettere0
Comparator
either alonee0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“Combinations of aminoethoxyvinylglycine (AVG, ReTain) and NAA gave better control of fruit drop of `Golden Delicious' than either alone.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 0–136 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Full-rate ReTain and reduced-rate ReTain plus NAA gave equivalent fruit-drop control.

Material
`Golden Delicious'e0
Treatment
full rate of ReTain (50 g/A)e0
Outcome
control of fruit drope0
Direction
equivalente0
Comparator
reduced rate of ReTain (86 g/ha) plus NAAe0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“When the full rate of ReTain (50 g/A) was compared to a reduced rate of ReTain (86 g/ha) plus NAA, equivalent control of fruit drop of `Golden Delicious' resulted.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 137–300 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ReTain delayed Golden Delicious fruit softening and starch depletion.

Material
`Golden Delicious'e0
Treatment
ReTaine0
Outcome
softening and starch depletione0
Direction
delayede0

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

e0

“ReTain delayed softening and starch depletion of `Golden Delicious' fruit.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 301–375 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA sometimes promoted earlier fruit maturity.

Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
fruit maturitye0
Direction
earliere0
Qualifier
in some casese0

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

e0

“NAA in some cases promoted earlier fruit maturity; but when used in combination with ReTain, maturity was similar to ReTain-treated fruit.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 376–514 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA with ReTain produced maturity similar to ReTain alone.

Treatment
combination with ReTaine0
Outcome
maturitye0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
ReTain-treated fruite0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“NAA in some cases promoted earlier fruit maturity; but when used in combination with ReTain, maturity was similar to ReTain-treated fruit.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 376–514 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit with the highest firmness and starch were in the best condition after cold storage.

Outcome
best conditione0
Direction
beste0
Comparator
highest firmness and starche0
Setting
cold storagee0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“Fruit with the highest firmness and starch came out of cold storage in the best condition.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 515–605 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Harvest-time EthylBloc or NAA did not inhibit Golden Delicious fruit drop.

Material
`Golden Delicious'e0
Treatment
1-methylcyclopropene (MCP, EthylBloc) or NAAe0
Outcome
fruit drope0
Direction
Neithere0
Qualifier
at harveste0

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

e0

“Neither 1-methylcyclopropene (MCP, EthylBloc) or NAA inhibited fruit drop of `Golden Delicious' fruit when applied at harvest;”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 606–732 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Ethephon caused faster and greater fruit drop than control.

Treatment
Ethephon spray treatmentse0
Outcome
fruit drope0
Direction
more rapid and extensivee0
Comparator
the controle0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“Ethephon spray treatments caused more rapid and extensive fruit drop than the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 873–959 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EthylBloc pretreatment did not prevent rapid drop after ethephon.

Treatment
gassed or sprayed with EthylBloc before ethephon sprayse0
Outcome
dropped rapidlye0
Direction
rapidlye0

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

e0

“Trees gassed or sprayed with EthylBloc before ethephon sprays also dropped rapidly.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 960–1043 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EthylBloc gas maintained Golden Delicious firmness by 19.1 N.

Material
`Golden Delicious'e0
Treatment
EthylBloc gase0
Outcome
firmnesse0
Direction
firmere0
Value
19.1 Ne0

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

e0

“`Golden Delicious' fruit on the tree were dramatically maintained firmer by the EthylBloc gas, and to a lesser extent by EthylBloc sprays by 19.1 N and 10.2 N firmness, respectively, tested on 28 Oct.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1044–1244 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EthylBloc spray maintained Golden Delicious firmness by 10.2 N.

Material
`Golden Delicious'e0
Treatment
EthylBloc sprayse0
Outcome
firmnesse0
Direction
firmere0
Value
10.2 Ne0

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

e0

“`Golden Delicious' fruit on the tree were dramatically maintained firmer by the EthylBloc gas, and to a lesser extent by EthylBloc sprays by 19.1 N and 10.2 N firmness, respectively, tested on 28 Oct.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1044–1244 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EthylBloc gas maintained starch, but spray did not.

Treatment
EthylBloc gase0
Outcome
Starche0
Direction
maintainede0
Comparator
the sprayse0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“Starch was maintained by the EthylBloc gas, but not by the sprays.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1245–1311 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA plus Silwet L-77 inhibited Law Rome fruit drop.

Material
`Law Rome'e0
Treatment
NAA plus Silwet L-77e0
Outcome
fruit drope0
Direction
inhibitede0

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

e0

“NAA plus Silwet L-77 inhibited fruit drop of `Law Rome', but none of the EthylBloc sprays inhibited fruit drop when applied at harvest.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1649–1784 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Harvest-time EthylBloc spray did not inhibit Law Rome fruit drop.

Material
`Law Rome'e0
Treatment
EthylBloc sprayse0
Outcome
fruit drope0
Direction
nonee0

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

e0

“NAA plus Silwet L-77 inhibited fruit drop of `Law Rome', but none of the EthylBloc sprays inhibited fruit drop when applied at harvest.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1649–1784 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EthylBloc sprays maintained Law Rome fruit firmness.

Treatment
EthylBloc sprays applied 21 Oct.e0
Outcome
fruit firmnesse0
Direction
maintainede0

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

e0

“EthylBloc sprays applied 21 Oct. dramatically maintained fruit firmness tested on 3 Nov.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1927–2015 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

EthylBloc gas did not maintain Law Rome starch.

Treatment
EthylBloc gase0
Outcome
Starche0
Direction
not maintainede0
Qualifier
starch had almost disappeared by the application time on 21 Oct.e0

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

e0

“Starch was not maintained by the EthylBloc gas, but starch had almost disappeared by the application time on 21 Oct.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2016–2132 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Longer shading increased fruit abscission relative to shorter shading and control.

Treatment
Shading trees with 92% polypropylene shade material for 3 or 7 dayse0
Outcome
fruit abscissione0
Direction
more rapide0
Comparator
the controle0

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

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

Verbatim

e0

“Shading trees with 92% polypropylene shade material for 3 or 7 days caused more rapid fruit abscission at 7 days than 3 days and both were greater than the control.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2306–2470 · show in text ↑
t0

“Apples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 102–108 · show in text ↑

1-methylcyclopropene · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

16 papers: 10 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

12 papers more in this group

See all 16 papers →

1-naphthaleneacetic acid · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

65 papers: 50 positive, 15 negative or no effect

49 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

61 papers more in this group

See all 65 papers →

(2-chloroethyl)phosphonic acid · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

73 papers: 44 positive, 29 negative or no effect

28 papers in the same direction as this paper · 44 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

69 papers more in this group

See all 73 papers →

poly(propylene) · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

3 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

1-naphthaleneacetic acid · control · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree

3 papers: 3 positive, 0 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
See all 3 papers →

shade · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

15 papers: 9 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

11 papers more in this group

See all 15 papers →

application · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

74 papers: 58 positive, 16 negative or no effect

57 papers in the same direction as this paper · 15 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. no effect

70 papers more in this group

See all 74 papers →

application · yield · Malus domestica (apple)Positive and negative results

141 papers: 107 positive, 34 negative or no effect

33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 107 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

137 papers more in this group

See all 141 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.