Paper · 2019 · Korean Journal of Plant Resources

Leaf Thinning and Fruit Quality of 'Hongro'/M.9 Apple Trees by Foliar Application of Cu-EDTA and Fe-EDTA

Heon-Kyu Lim; Hyunsuk Shin; In-Chang Son; et al.

11
claims
11
verbatim quotes
4
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Hand leaf thinning for improvement of fruit coloration and quality is one of the most labor-consuming works in Korean apple cultivation. The study was aimed at investigating whether foliar application of two chelate compounds (Cu-EDTA, Fe-EDTA) could defoliate effectively ‘Hongro’/M.9 apple leaves and enhance fruit coloration and quality. At 30 days before harvest, foliar spray with two chelate compounds defoliated significantly the apple leaves. Chelate treatments did not affect the leaf chlorophyll content. High concentration of chelates decreased drastically photosynthetic rate of true leaves, and then it stayed in low levels, whereas low levels of chelates reduced sharply the photosynthetic rate but it was gradually restored over time. Cu-EDTA regardless of its concentration triggered higher defoliation compared to Fe-EDTA. Consequently, higher defoliation improved light interception of fruits and accumulated more anthocyanin. Particularly, Cu-EDTA could target mainly fruit cluster leaves which affect directly light interception of the fruits, i.e. more selective defoliants compared to Fe-EDTA. However, 3% Cu-EDTA rather defoliated excessively, accompanying with reduction of fruit weight and soluble solids. Therefore, our results suggest that 1% Cu-EDTA which defoliates properly the fruit cluster leaves could improve coloration and quality of ‘Hongro’/M.9 apple fruits.

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 11

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Chelate sprays significantly defoliated apple leaves.

Treatment
foliar spray with two chelate compoundse0
Outcome
apple leavese0
Direction
defoliatede0

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

“At 30 days before harvest, foliar spray with two chelate compounds defoliated significantly the apple leaves.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 341–450 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Chelates did not affect leaf chlorophyll content.

Treatment
Chelate treatmentse0
Outcome
leaf chlorophyll contente0
Direction
did not affecte0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Chelate treatments did not affect the leaf chlorophyll content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 451–514 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

High chelate concentration drastically decreased photosynthetic rate and it remained low.

Treatment
High concentration of chelatese0
Outcome
photosynthetic ratee0
Direction
decreasede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“High concentration of chelates decreased drastically photosynthetic rate of true leaves, and then it stayed in low levels”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 515–636 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmixedmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low chelate concentration sharply reduced photosynthetic rate, which later recovered.

Treatment
low levels of chelatese0
Outcome
photosynthetic ratee0
Direction
reducede0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“low levels of chelates reduced sharply the photosynthetic rate but it was gradually restored over time.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 646–749 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cu-EDTA produced more defoliation than Fe-EDTA.

Treatment
Cu-EDTAe0
Outcome
defoliatione0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
Fe-EDTAe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Cu-EDTA regardless of its concentration triggered higher defoliation compared to Fe-EDTA.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 750–839 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Greater defoliation improved light interception by fruit.

Treatment
higher defoliatione0
Outcome
light interception of fruitse0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“higher defoliation improved light interception of fruits”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 854–910 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Greater defoliation accumulated more anthocyanin.

Treatment
higher defoliatione0
Outcome
anthocyanine0
Direction
moree0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“higher defoliation improved light interception of fruits and accumulated more anthocyanin.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 854–944 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cu-EDTA selectively targeted fruit cluster leaves relative to Fe-EDTA.

Treatment
Cu-EDTAe0
Outcome
fruit cluster leavese0
Direction
more selectivee0
Comparator
Fe-EDTAe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Cu-EDTA could target mainly fruit cluster leaves which affect directly light interception of the fruits, i.e. more selective defoliants compared to Fe-EDTA.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 959–1115 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

3% Cu-EDTA reduced fruit weight and soluble solids.

Treatment
3% Cu-EDTAe0
Outcome
fruit weight and soluble solidse0
Direction
reductione0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“3% Cu-EDTA rather defoliated excessively, accompanying with reduction of fruit weight and soluble solids.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1125–1230 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Authors suggest 1% Cu-EDTA to improve apple coloration and quality.

Outcome
improve coloration and qualitye0

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

Malus domestica
Malus domestica · TaxonW.carter · CC0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“1% Cu-EDTA which defoliates properly the fruit cluster leaves could improve coloration and quality of ‘Hongro’/M.9 apple fruits.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1267–1395 · show in text ↑

copper atom · quality: sugar starch · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. negative
See all 2 papers →

copper atom · pest · Malus domestica (apple)Results agree

4 papers: 4 positive, 0 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 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.