Abstract
Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material to study the effects of spraying with the different concentrations of calcium fertilizer on grape fruit external quality and intrinsic quality.Fruits were sprayed 0.1%, 0.2%, 0.3% Calcium nitrate solution during the fruit color-changed period, and fruits were sprayed clear water for the check.The results showed that the different concentrations of calcium fertilizer improved the appearance quality and intrinsic quality of the 'ruby seedless' grape fruit.Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect.The fruit weight of the grape increased by 23.4%, the fruit firmness increased by 83.6%, the content of the titratable acid decreased by 24.7%, the content of soluble solids increased by 16.33%, the content of soluble sugar increased by 27.53%, and the content of Vc increased by 19.0%.The results of this experiment provided some guidance for supplementing calcium and improving fruit quality in grape production.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc. 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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Different concentrations of calcium fertilizer improved appearance quality and intrinsic quality of ruby seedless grape fruit compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e1“the different concentrations of calcium fertilizer improved the appearance quality and intrinsic quality of the 'ruby seedless' grape fruit”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution increased grape fruit weight by 23.4% compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
e3“The fruit weight of the grape increased by 23.4%”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution increased fruit firmness by 83.6% compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
e4“the fruit firmness increased by 83.6%”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution decreased titratable acid content by 24.7% compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
e5“the content of the titratable acid decreased by 24.7%”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution increased soluble solids content by 16.33% compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
e6“the content of soluble solids increased by 16.33%”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution increased soluble sugar content by 27.53% compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
e7“the content of soluble sugar increased by 27.53%”
Claim · model-written summary
Spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution increased Vc content by 19.0% compared with the control.
Verbatim
e0“Three-year-old 'ruby seedless' grapes were used for trial material”
e2“Compared with the control, spraying 0.3% calcium nitrate solution had the most significant effect”
e7“the content of Vc increased by 19.0%”
The same questions in other papers
calcium atom · quality: general · VitisPositive and negative results
7 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →calcium nitrate · yield · VitisResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
calcium nitrate · quality: postharvest · VitisResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
calcium nitrate · quality: sugar starch · VitisResults agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
fertilization · quality: general · VitisPositive and negative results
27 papers in the same direction as this paper · 10 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
- no effect
34 papers more in this group
See all 38 papers →application · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
33 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- negative
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →application · molecular: metabolites · VitisPositive and negative results
45 papers in the same direction as this paper · 5 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
47 papers more in this group
See all 51 papers →application · yield · VitisPositive and negative results
79 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
83 papers more in this group
See all 87 papers →8 of 10 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
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.