Paper · 2019 · Italus Hortus

Improving profitability: assessment of new rootstocks and planting systems

Martin Balmer

10
claims
21
verbatim quotes
6
citations
4
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by-nc

Abstract

For over 25 years, rootstocks for sweet cherries are evaluated in different locations in the german federal state of Rhenania Palatinate. They are situated in a vine growing climate and have medium-heavy soils. Replant disease of stone fruit plays a significant role in most orchards. In general, all trees in the rootstock trials are trained as central leader and planted 4.0 to 4.5 m by 2.0 to 3.0 m depending on the expected vigour. In addition to the common performance parameters, tree health, anchorage and tendency for root suckers are observed. In 2013 a new rootstock trial has been established including, inter alia, the new Weigi series and some recent Gisela numbers. In the experimental orchard of Oppenheim, replanted soil can be compared to new land. Up to now, Weigi 2 is slightly more dwarfing but also less productive in this trial what is no disadvantage regarding the fruit size. In the group of semi-dwarfing rootstocks Weigi 1, Weigi 3, Gisela 13 and Gisela 17 seem to be similar both in vigour and yield efficiency. In this group there is an interest to replace PiKu 1 which turned out to be not winter hardy enough and susceptible to heavy soils and bark beetles under German conditions. Training trials revealed that also with low tree forms, yields and qualities comparable to the spindle can be obtained. The picking performance can be improved in many cases. Mechanical pruning only makes sense if it is combined with manual correction pruning. An exclusive mechanical pruning reduces the fruit size and can also reduce the picking performance.

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 10

Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weigi 2 was slightly more dwarfing in the rootstock trial.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Material
Weigi 2e0
Outcome
dwarfinge0
Direction
moree0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Weigi 2 is slightly more dwarfing but also less productive in this trial”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–849 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weigi 2 was less productive in the rootstock trial.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Material
Weigi 2e0
Outcome
productivee0
Direction
lesse0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Weigi 2 is slightly more dwarfing but also less productive in this trial”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–849 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The lower productivity of Weigi 2 was not a disadvantage for fruit size.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Material
Weigi 2e1
Outcome
fruit sizee0
Direction
no disadvantagee0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“what is no disadvantage regarding the fruit size”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 850–898 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
e1

“Weigi 2”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 777–784 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Weigi 1, Weigi 3, Gisela 13 and Gisela 17 appeared similar in vigour and yield efficiency.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Outcome
vigour and yield efficiencye0
Direction
similare0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Weigi 1, Weigi 3, Gisela 13 and Gisela 17 seem to be similar both in vigour and yield efficiency”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 941–1037 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

PiKu 1 was insufficiently winter hardy and susceptible to heavy soils and bark beetles under German conditions.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Material
PiKu 1e0
Outcome
not winter hardy enough and susceptible to heavy soils and bark beetlese0
Setting
German conditionse0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“PiKu 1 which turned out to be not winter hardy enough and susceptible to heavy soils and bark beetles under German conditions”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1085–1210 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Low tree forms produced yields and qualities comparable to spindle training.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Treatment
low tree formse0
Outcome
yields and qualitiese0
Direction
comparablee0
Comparator
spindlee0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“also with low tree forms, yields and qualities comparable to the spindle can be obtained”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1242–1330 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Picking performance improved in many cases.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Outcome
picking performancee0
Direction
improvede0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The picking performance can be improved in many cases”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1332–1385 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultbasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Mechanical pruning was recommended only with manual correction pruning.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Outcome
Mechanical pruning only makes sense if it is combined with manual correction pruninge0

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Mechanical pruning only makes sense if it is combined with manual correction pruning”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1387–1471 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Exclusive mechanical pruning reduced fruit size.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Treatment
exclusive mechanical pruninge0
Outcome
fruit sizee0
Direction
reducese0

Not reportedComparator

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“An exclusive mechanical pruning reduces the fruit size”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1473–1527 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Exclusive mechanical pruning could reduce picking performance.

Taxon
sweet cherriesPrunus aviumt0
Treatment
exclusive mechanical pruninge0
Outcome
picking performancee0
Direction
reducee0

Not reportedComparator

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

Prunus avium
Prunus avium · TaxonMPF · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“An exclusive mechanical pruning reduces the fruit size and can also reduce the picking performance”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1473–1571 · show in text ↑
t0

“rootstocks for sweet cherries”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 19–48 · show in text ↑

pruning · yield · Prunus avium (sweet cherry)Results differ

21 papers: 14 positive, 7 negative or no effect

6 papers in the same direction as this paper · 14 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 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.