Paper · 2017 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

Effect of Naphthalene Acetic Acid and Calcium chloride on pre-harvest drop and quality of ‘Red Delicious’ apple.

Munib Ur Rehman; Ghulam Hassan Rather; Yasmeen Gull; et al.

5
claims
9
verbatim quotes
2
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

An investigation was carried out for two consecutive years to study the suitability of 1-naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA) alone or in combination with calcium chloride (CaCl2) to control preharvest fruit drop and their effect on fruit quality of ‘Red Delicious’ apple (Malus pumila Mill.). The following five treatments combinations were tested: (1) control, the trees sprayed with water only; (2) a single spray with NAA; (3) two sprays with NAA at an interval of 14 d; (4) a single spray with NAA + CaCl2; and (5) two sprays with NAA + CaCl2 in combination at an interval of 14 d. NAA was sprayed at the rate of 20 mg L−1 and CaCl2 was sprayed at 3 g L−1. NAA applications reduced fruit drop appreciably when sprayed one month before harvest. The spray was effective in retaining the fruit on the tree for ∼14 d and the second spray after the 14 d of the first spray retained the fruit for another ∼14 d; however, the keeping quality of the fruit was reduced. No significant effect of CaCl2 sprays could be observed on maintaining the keeping quality of apple.

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 5

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA applications one month before harvest appreciably reduced fruit drop.

Treatment
NAA applicationse0
Outcome
fruit drope0
Direction
reducede0

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 applications reduced fruit drop appreciably when sprayed one month before harvest.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 654–740 · show in text ↑
t0

“‘Red Delicious’ apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–111 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A first NAA spray retained fruit on trees for about 14 days.

Treatment
The spraye0
Outcome
retaining the fruit on the treee0
Direction
retaininge0
Value
∼14 de0

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

“The spray was effective in retaining the fruit on the tree for ∼14 d”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 741–809 · show in text ↑
t0

“‘Red Delicious’ apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–111 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

A second NAA spray retained fruit for about another 14 days.

Treatment
the second spraye0
Outcome
retained the fruite0
Direction
retainede0
Value
∼14 de0

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

“the second spray after the 14 d of the first spray retained the fruit for another ∼14 d; however, the keeping quality of the fruit was reduced.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 814–957 · show in text ↑
t0

“‘Red Delicious’ apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–111 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The second spray reduced fruit keeping quality.

Treatment
the second spraye0
Outcome
keeping quality of the fruite0
Direction
reducede0

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

“the second spray after the 14 d of the first spray retained the fruit for another ∼14 d; however, the keeping quality of the fruit was reduced.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 814–957 · show in text ↑
t0

“‘Red Delicious’ apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 90–111 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium chloride sprays had no significant effect on keeping quality.

Treatment
CaCl2 sprayse0
Outcome
keeping quality of applee0
Direction
No significant effecte0

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

“No significant effect of CaCl2 sprays could be observed on maintaining the keeping quality of apple.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 958–1058 · show in text ↑

calcium chloride dihydrate · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

47 papers: 41 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 41 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

43 papers more in this group

See all 47 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. positive
  2. positive
  3. no effect

61 papers more in this group

See all 65 papers →

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

74 papers: 58 positive, 16 negative or no effect

15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 58 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

70 papers more in this group

See all 74 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.