Abstract
The agronomic response of sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) ‘Prime Giant’ to a 4 year-long experiment involving deficit irrigation strategies in a Mediterranean climate was studied in a commercial orchard located in the southeast of Spain (Jumilla, Spain). Four drip irrigation treatments were imposed: (i) control treatment (CTL), irrigated without restrictions at 110% of seasonal crop evapotranspiration (ETc); (ii) sustained deficit irrigation (SDI) treatment irrigated at 85% ETc during pre-harvest and post-harvest periods and at 100% ETc during floral differentiation; (iii) regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) treatment irrigated at 100% ETc during pre-harvest and floral differentiation and at 55% ETc during post-harvest, and (iv) farmer treatment (FRM), irrigated according to the farmer’s normal practice. The crop’s response to the different irrigation treatments was analyzed in relation to tree water status. Soil water deficit reduced tree midday stem water potential (Ψstem), stomatal conductance (gs) and net photosynthesis (Pn). Branch maximum daily shrinkage (MDS) responded rapidly to irrigation changes during pre-harvest and post-harvest. The lowest Ψstem values were reached by SDI during pre-harvest and by RDI and FRM during post-harvest. RDI did not lead to Ψstem water potentials falling to below the threshold of −1.6 MPa in any season, although, FRM caused, Ψstem to fall below −1.8 MPa in 2017. RDI reduced vegetative growth and did not cause significant lower yields or fruit quality. However, with SDI there was a trend towards smaller fruits and a slightly higher soluble solid content. Post-harvest deficit irrigation increased water productivity without penalizing fruit yield or the quality parameters studied, and allowed water savings of 39% compared to CTL at a time when other fruit tree species require more water. Moreover, RDI and SDI led to significantly less cracking incidence and a lower cracking index, which could extend fruit shelf life.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by-nc-nd. 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 16
Claim · model-written summary
Soil water deficit reduced midday stem water potential, stomatal conductance and net photosynthesis.
- Taxon
- sweet cherry
Prunus aviume1 - Treatment
- Soil water deficite0
- Outcome
- tree midday stem water potential (Ψstem), stomatal conductance (gs) and net photosynthesis (Pn)e0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Soil water deficit reduced tree midday stem water potential (Ψstem), stomatal conductance (gs) and net photosynthesis (Pn)”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Branch maximum daily shrinkage responded rapidly to irrigation changes before and after harvest.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Outcome
- Branch maximum daily shrinkage (MDS)e0
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Branch maximum daily shrinkage (MDS) responded rapidly to irrigation changes during pre-harvest and post-harvest”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
SDI gave the lowest stem water potential before harvest.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest Ψstem values were reached by SDI during pre-harvest and by RDI and FRM during post-harvest”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
RDI gave the lowest stem water potential after harvest.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest Ψstem values were reached by SDI during pre-harvest and by RDI and FRM during post-harvest”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
FRM gave the lowest stem water potential after harvest.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The lowest Ψstem values were reached by SDI during pre-harvest and by RDI and FRM during post-harvest”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
RDI stem water potential stayed above −1.6 MPa in every season.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- RDIe0
- Outcome
- Ψstem water potentialse0
- Direction
- did not lead toe0
- Value
- −1.6 MPae0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“RDI did not lead to Ψstem water potentials falling to below the threshold of −1.6 MPa in any season”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
FRM stem water potential fell below −1.8 MPa in 2017.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“FRM caused, Ψstem to fall below −1.8 MPa in 2017”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
RDI reduced vegetative growth.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- RDIe0
- Outcome
- vegetative growthe0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“RDI reduced vegetative growth”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
RDI did not significantly lower yield or fruit quality.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- RDIe0
- Outcome
- yields or fruit qualitye0
- Direction
- did not cause significant lowere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“RDI reduced vegetative growth and did not cause significant lower yields or fruit quality”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
SDI tended toward smaller fruits.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- SDIe0
- Outcome
- fruitse0
- Direction
- smallere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with SDI there was a trend towards smaller fruits”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
SDI tended toward slightly higher soluble solids.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- SDIe0
- Outcome
- soluble solid contente0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“with SDI there was a trend towards smaller fruits and a slightly higher soluble solid content”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Post-harvest deficit irrigation increased water productivity.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- Post-harvest deficit irrigatione0
- Outcome
- water productivitye0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Post-harvest deficit irrigation increased water productivity without penalizing fruit yield or the quality parameters studied”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Post-harvest deficit irrigation did not penalize fruit yield or studied quality parameters.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- Post-harvest deficit irrigatione0
- Outcome
- fruit yield or the quality parameters studiede0
- Direction
- without penalizinge0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Post-harvest deficit irrigation increased water productivity without penalizing fruit yield or the quality parameters studied”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
Post-harvest deficit irrigation saved 39% water versus CTL.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume2
- Treatment
- Post-harvest deficit irrigatione1
- Outcome
- water savingse0
- Direction
- savingse0
- Value
- 39%e0
- Comparator
- CTLe0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“allowed water savings of 39% compared to CTL”
e1“Post-harvest deficit irrigation”
e2“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
RDI significantly lowered cracking incidence and cracking index.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- RDIe0
- Outcome
- cracking incidence and a lower cracking indexe0
- Direction
- lesse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“RDI and SDI led to significantly less cracking incidence and a lower cracking index”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
Claim · model-written summary
SDI significantly lowered cracking incidence and cracking index.
- Taxon
- sweet cherryPrunus aviume1
- Treatment
- SDIe0
- Outcome
- cracking incidence and a lower cracking indexe0
- Direction
- lesse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“RDI and SDI led to significantly less cracking incidence and a lower cracking index”
e1“sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.)”
The same questions in other papers
drought · physiology: photosynthesis · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Results differ
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
irrigation · disease · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
irrigation · quality: general · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
irrigation · growth · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- positive
4 papers more in this group
See all 8 papers →irrigation · physiology: water · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Positive and negative results
10 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
8 papers more in this group
See all 12 papers →irrigation · yield · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Positive and negative results
8 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- no effect
14 papers more in this group
See all 18 papers →irrigation · molecular: metabolites · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
irrigation · quality: grain · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Results agree
4 papers in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 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.