Paper · 2021 · Seed and Plant Improvment Journal

Growth and Nutrients Uptake in Commercial Pear Cultivars on Seedling, Pyrodwarf® and OH × F69 Rootstocks

A. Esmaili; Hamid Abdollahi; M. Bazgir; et al.

11
claims
22
verbatim quotes
1
citations
3
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

Pyrodwarf and OH × F69 rootstocks are the main clonal rootstocks for pear trees in Iran. This research was conducted to compare growth and nutrient uptake in different commercial pear cultivars including; Louise Bonne, Dargazi and William`s Duchesse on Pyrodwarf, OH × F69 and Dargazi seedling rootstocks in two years in the nursery. Both clonal rootstocks inducted higher growth in cultivars. Cultivar Louise Bonne had the highest growth on Pyrodwarf rootstock. Calcium content varied from 1.4% to 1.5%, but nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and manganese showed higher variation, and the highest content of these nutrients were observed in cultivar Dargazi on Pyrodwarf rootstock. The lowest and the highest variations were observed in zinc and iron content, respectively. In addition, about 30% of total iron of the leaves was active iron, indicating high level of active iron in pear in comparison with other fruit tree species. In all graft combinations, variation in micro and macro nutrients contents were in optimum range. Comparison of nutrient contents with active lime level in soil indicated that the range of 10-15% active lime in soil would not hinder growth and nutrients uptake of plants.

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 resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Both clonal rootstocks induced higher growth in pear cultivars

Treatment
clonal rootstockse1
Outcome
growthe1
Direction
highere1

Not reportedComparator

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e1

“Both clonal rootstocks inducted higher growth in cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 334–392 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Cultivar Louise Bonne had the highest growth on Pyrodwarf rootstock

Material
Louise Bonnee2
Treatment
Pyrodwarf rootstocke2
Outcome
highest growthe2

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e2

“Cultivar Louise Bonne had the highest growth on Pyrodwarf rootstock”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 394–461 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Calcium content in pear leaves varied from 1.4% to 1.5%

Outcome
Calcium contente3
Value
1.4% to 1.5%e3

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e3

“Calcium content varied from 1.4% to 1.5%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 463–503 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium contents were highest in cultivar Dargazi on Pyrodwarf rootstock

Material
Dargazie4
Treatment
Pyrodwarf rootstocke4
Outcome
nitrogen, phosphorus, potassiume4
Qualifier
highest contente4

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e4

“nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and manganese showed higher variation, and the highest content of these nutrients were observed in cultivar Dargazi on Pyrodwarf rootstock”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 509–679 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Manganese content was highest in cultivar Dargazi on Pyrodwarf rootstock

Material
Dargazie4
Treatment
Pyrodwarf rootstocke4
Outcome
manganesee4
Qualifier
highest contente4

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e4

“nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and manganese showed higher variation, and the highest content of these nutrients were observed in cultivar Dargazi on Pyrodwarf rootstock”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 509–679 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Zinc content showed the lowest variation among the nutrients

Compound
zince5
Outcome
variationse5
Qualifier
The loweste5

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e5

“The lowest and the highest variations were observed in zinc and iron content, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 681–771 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Iron content showed the highest variation among the nutrients

Compound
irone5
Outcome
variationse5
Qualifier
the higheste5

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e5

“The lowest and the highest variations were observed in zinc and iron content, respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 681–771 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

About 30% of total iron in pear leaves was active iron

Organ / stage
leavese6
Outcome
active irone6
Value
about 30%e6

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e6

“about 30% of total iron of the leaves was active iron”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 786–839 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Pear had a higher level of active iron than other fruit tree species

Outcome
active irone7
Qualifier
high levele7
Comparator
other fruit tree speciese7

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e7

“indicating high level of active iron in pear in comparison with other fruit tree species”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 841–929 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Micro and macro nutrient contents were within the optimum range in all graft combinations

Treatment
graft combinationse0
Outcome
micro and macro nutrients contentse0
Qualifier
optimum rangee0

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e0

“In all graft combinations, variation in micro and macro nutrients contents were in optimum range”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 931–1027 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil active lime at 10-15% would not hinder growth and nutrient uptake of pear

Treatment
10-15% active lime in soile1
Outcome
growth and nutrients uptakee1

Not reportedDirection

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

Pyrus communis
Pyrus communis · TaxonDidier Descouens · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Commercial Pear Cultivars”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 31–56 · show in text ↑
e1

“the range of 10-15% active lime in soil would not hinder growth and nutrients uptake of plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1107–1201 · show in text ↑

grafting · growth · Pyrus communis (pear)Positive and negative results

12 papers: 11 positive, 1 negative or no effect

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

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive

8 papers more in this group

See all 12 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.