Paper · 2019 · Canadian Journal of Plant Science

Multiple season-long sprays of ethephon or NAA combined with calcium chloride on ‘Honeycrisp’ apples: I. Effect on bloom and fruit quality attributes

John A. Cline

10
claims
19
verbatim quotes
3
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

‘Honeycrisp’ apple trees are highly prone to biennial bearing and predisposed to bitter pit. The hypothesis that tank mix sprays of ethephon (ETH), naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA), and 1-aminocyclopropane carboxylic acid (ACC) combined with calcium chloride (CaCl 2 ) can mitigate these production problems was tested in a 3-yr study. Mature ‘Honeycrisp’ trees were treated with either three or six summer applications of 150 mg L −1 ETH or 5 mg L −1 NAA, all tank-mixed with and without CaCl 2 , or two or five applications of 150 mg L −1 ACC (without CaCl 2 ). Treatments were applied at 10-d intervals and initiated between 21 and 26 June. All treatments had little effect on enhancing return bloom of ‘Honeycrisp’. NAA, ETH, and CaCl 2 all influenced fruit maturity and quality at harvest to varying degrees and across years. Fruit treated with NAA were firmer compared with untreated fruit in 2 out of 3 yr, whereas overall, fruit treated with six sprays of ETH had lower fruit firmness and were more mature. NAA had less influence on fruit quality attributes at harvest than did ETH, and decreased pre-harvest fruit drop (PFD). PFD increased with ETH in 1 out of 2 yr, whereas ACC and NAA both decreased PFD in 1 out of 2 yr. Overall, ETH and NAA, with or without CaCl 2 , had significant but inconsistent effects on fruit quality and maturity, all dependent on the year and number of applications. Adding CaCl 2 decreased fruit firmness in 2 out of 3 yr.

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 10

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The treatments had little effect on return bloom.

Taxon
‘Honeycrisp’e0
Treatment
All treatmentse0
Outcome
return bloome0
Direction
little effecte0

Not reportedComparator

Verbatim

e0

“All treatments had little effect on enhancing return bloom of ‘Honeycrisp’”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 640–714 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA treated fruit were firmer than untreated fruit in two of three years.

Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
Fruite0
Direction
firmere0
Qualifier
2 out of 3 yre0
Comparator
untreated 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

“Fruit treated with NAA were firmer compared with untreated fruit in 2 out of 3 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 827–908 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Six ETH sprays lowered fruit firmness.

Treatment
six sprays of ETHe0
Outcome
fruit firmnesse0
Direction
lowere0

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

“fruit treated with six sprays of ETH had lower fruit firmness”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 927–988 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Six ETH sprays made fruit more mature.

Treatment
six sprays of ETHe0
Outcome
fruite0
Direction
more maturee0

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

“fruit treated with six sprays of ETH had lower fruit firmness and were more mature”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 927–1009 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA decreased preharvest fruit drop.

Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
pre-harvest fruit drop (PFD)e0
Direction
decreasede0

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 had less influence on fruit quality attributes at harvest than did ETH, and decreased pre-harvest fruit drop (PFD)”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1011–1129 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA influenced harvest fruit quality less than ETH.

Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
fruit quality attributes at harveste0
Direction
less influencee0
Comparator
ETHe0

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 had less influence on fruit quality attributes at harvest than did ETH”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1011–1085 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ETH increased preharvest fruit drop in one of two years.

Treatment
ETHe0
Outcome
PFDe0
Direction
increasede0
Qualifier
1 out of 2 yre0

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

“PFD increased with ETH in 1 out of 2 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1131–1170 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

ACC decreased preharvest fruit drop in one of two years.

Treatment
ACCe0
Outcome
PFDe0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
1 out of 2 yre0

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

“ACC and NAA both decreased PFD in 1 out of 2 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1180–1227 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

NAA decreased preharvest fruit drop in one of two years.

Treatment
NAAe0
Outcome
PFDe0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
1 out of 2 yre0

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

“ACC and NAA both decreased PFD in 1 out of 2 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1180–1227 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Adding CaCl 2 decreased fruit firmness in two of three years.

Treatment
Adding CaCl 2e0
Outcome
fruit firmnesse0
Direction
decreasede0
Qualifier
2 out of 3 yre0

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

“Adding CaCl 2 decreased fruit firmness in 2 out of 3 yr”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1402–1457 · show in text ↑
t0

“apple”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 94–99 · show in text ↑

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

8 papers: 7 positive, 1 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. no effect
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

(2-chloroethyl)phosphonic acid · quality: postharvest · Malus domestica (apple)Results differ

32 papers: 26 positive, 6 negative or no effect

5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 26 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

28 papers more in this group

See all 32 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. positive

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 →

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

15 papers: 14 positive, 1 negative or no effect

14 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

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

  1. positive
  2. positive
  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.