Paper · 2015 · Acta Horticulturae

EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT FRUIT THINNERS ON YIELD AND FRUIT QUALITY OF 'ROCHA' PEAR (PYRUS COMMUNIS L.)

C. Fernandes

6
claims
16
verbatim quotes
4
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

‘Rocha’ pear is a cultivar grown in Portugal, with high fruit quality and production when properly managed. Few products are available in Portugal for chemical thinning of ‘Rocha’ pear, and most of them show low efficacy. From 2011 to 2013, a trial was carried out to determine the right active ingredient, its concentration and application date in order to achieve the best yield and fruit quality results of chemical thinning in ‘Rocha’ pear. The trial was carried out in a commercial orchard in Bombarral, Portugal in the heart of ‘Rocha’ pear production. Trees were sprayed with benzyladenine (6-BA), naphtylacetic acid (NAA), prohexadione-calcium (ProCa), gibberellins (GA4+7) and forclorfenuron (CPPU). Two different thinning moments were established: chemical thinning when fruitlets’ diameter was between 11 and 13 mm; 24 mm for hand thinning. Unthinned control trees were used to compare the results obtained. Along the season fruit diameter was measured, and at harvest, fruit number and weight were evaluated, as well as fruit diameter, flesh firmness, total soluble solids (TSS), starch, and titratable acidity. Yield, fruit weight and fruit size were higher for the 6-BA 100 ppm + NAA 10 ppm combination. This mix proved to be effective in the decrease of fruit number during the three years’ trials (data not show). There was a slightly negative correlation between fruit weight and flesh firmness in treatments with NAA+6-BA but a positive correlation between fruit weight, TSS content, starch and acidity. In this trial no clear relationship was observed between the increase in the amount of the active ingredient and yield.

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 6

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

6-BA plus NAA increased pear yield.

Treatment
6-BA 100 ppm + NAA 10 ppme0
Outcome
Yielde0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
Unthinned control treese1

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yield, fruit weight and fruit size were higher for the 6-BA 100 ppm + NAA 10 ppm combination”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1124–1216 · show in text ↑
t0

“PEAR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–78 · show in text ↑
e1

“Unthinned control trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 852–875 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

6-BA plus NAA increased pear fruit weight and size.

Treatment
6-BA 100 ppm + NAA 10 ppme0
Outcome
fruit weight and fruit sizee0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
Unthinned control treese1

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Yield, fruit weight and fruit size were higher for the 6-BA 100 ppm + NAA 10 ppm combination”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1124–1216 · show in text ↑
t0

“PEAR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–78 · show in text ↑
e1

“Unthinned control trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 852–875 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The 6-BA and NAA mix decreased fruit number across the three trials.

Treatment
6-BA 100 ppm + NAA 10 ppme1
Outcome
fruit numbere0
Direction
decreasee0
Qualifier
during the three years’ trials (data not show)e0
Comparator
Unthinned control treese2

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“This mix proved to be effective in the decrease of fruit number during the three years’ trials (data not show)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1218–1328 · show in text ↑
t0

“PEAR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–78 · show in text ↑
e1

“6-BA 100 ppm + NAA 10 ppm combination”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1179–1216 · show in text ↑
e2

“Unthinned control trees”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 852–875 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit weight was slightly negatively correlated with flesh firmness under NAA plus 6-BA.

Treatment
NAA+6-BAe0
Outcome
fruit weight and flesh firmnesse0
Direction
slightly negative correlatione0

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“There was a slightly negative correlation between fruit weight and flesh firmness in treatments with NAA+6-BA”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1330–1439 · show in text ↑
t0

“PEAR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–78 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fruit weight was positively correlated with TSS content, starch and acidity.

Organ / stage
fruite0
Outcome
fruit weight, TSS content, starch and aciditye0
Direction
positive correlatione0

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“a positive correlation between fruit weight, TSS content, starch and acidity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1444–1520 · show in text ↑
t0

“PEAR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–78 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Active ingredient amount showed no clear relation to yield.

Treatment
active ingrediente0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
no clear relationshipe0

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“no clear relationship was observed between the increase in the amount of the active ingredient and yield”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1536–1640 · show in text ↑
t0

“PEAR”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 74–78 · show in text ↑

N-benzyladenine · yield · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results

6 papers: 4 positive, 2 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

2 papers more in this group

See all 6 papers →

1-naphthaleneacetic acid · yield · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results

10 papers: 8 positive, 2 negative or no effect

7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction

  1. negative
  2. no effect
  3. positive

6 papers more in this group

See all 10 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.