Abstract
A reasonable main branch opening angle can improve the canopy light environment of a tree, change the direction of nutrient transport, and promote the formation of flower buds. In this experiment, 3-year-old ‘Lu Hong 618’ was used as the test material to study the effects of different main branch opening angles (three treatments: 45°, 65°, and 85°) on the canopy light distribution, canopy characteristics, fruit quality, and flower bud quality of ‘Y’-shaped peach trees. The main findings were as follows: the solar energy utilization in the canopy varied greatly between different main branch opening angles, with the best relative light intensity of the canopy at 85°. In addition, the canopy light distribution on photosynthesis was more reasonable at 85°, and the daily variation range of CO2 concentration in the inner canopy was the greatest, which facilitated ventilation and light penetration in the inner canopy. With the increase in the main branch opening angle, the new growth of peach trees and the growth of the main branch trunk were inhibited. A reasonable branch opening angle results in good branch structure and leaf morphology. Leaf stomatal morphology and the soluble sugar and starch contents at different levels of the canopy are influenced by canopy light, and higher levels of canopy light can significantly increase the stomatal size and improve the leaf photosynthetic capacity, SPAD value, and soluble sugar and starch contents. With the increase in the main branch opening angle, C/N tended to increase. In addition, the distribution pattern of fruit quality in the canopy was similar to that of light distribution. In the same fruiting part, the fruit quality was higher at 85° and 45° than at 65° and slightly higher at 85° than at 45°, but the difference was not significant. The effects of different main branch opening angle treatments on the fruit weight, flesh firmness, soluble solids, and titratable acid were more significant. The 85° pulling angle effectively increased the light intensity of the different canopy layers of the peach trees and promoted the accumulation of nutrients. An 85° pulling angle can be used as a more suitable pulling angle for peach tree shaping cultivation.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. 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 15
Claim · model-written summary
The 85° angle produced the best relative canopy light intensity.
- Treatment
- 85°e0
- Outcome
- relative light intensity of the canopye0
- Direction
- beste0
- Comparator
- different main branch opening anglese0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“the solar energy utilization in the canopy varied greatly between different main branch opening angles, with the best relative light intensity of the canopy at 85°.”
Claim · model-written summary
At 85°, canopy light distribution for photosynthesis was more reasonable.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“the canopy light distribution on photosynthesis was more reasonable at 85°”
Claim · model-written summary
At 85°, inner-canopy CO2 concentration had the greatest daily variation range.
- Organ / stage
- inner canopye0
- Treatment
- 85°e0
- Outcome
- daily variation range of CO2 concentratione0
- Direction
- greateste0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“In addition, the canopy light distribution on photosynthesis was more reasonable at 85°, and the daily variation range of CO2 concentration in the inner canopy was the greatest”
Claim · model-written summary
Increasing branch angle inhibited new peach growth and main branch trunk growth.
- Taxon
- peach trees
Prunus persicae0 - Treatment
- increase in the main branch opening anglee0
- Outcome
- new growth of peach trees and the growth of the main branch trunke0
- Direction
- inhibitede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“With the increase in the main branch opening angle, the new growth of peach trees and the growth of the main branch trunk were inhibited.”
Claim · model-written summary
A reasonable opening angle produced good branch structure and leaf morphology.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“A reasonable branch opening angle results in good branch structure and leaf morphology.”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher canopy light significantly increased stomatal size.
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“higher levels of canopy light can significantly increase the stomatal size and improve the leaf photosynthetic capacity, SPAD value, and soluble sugar and starch contents.”
Claim · model-written summary
Higher canopy light improved photosynthetic capacity, SPAD value, and soluble sugar and starch contents.
- Treatment
- higher levels of canopy lighte0
- Outcome
- leaf photosynthetic capacity, SPAD value, and soluble sugar and starch contentse0
- Direction
- improvee0
Not reportedTaxonComparator
Verbatim
e0“higher levels of canopy light can significantly increase the stomatal size and improve the leaf photosynthetic capacity, SPAD value, and soluble sugar and starch contents.”
Claim · model-written summary
C/N tended to increase as branch opening angle increased.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“With the increase in the main branch opening angle, C/N tended to increase.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit quality distribution within the canopy resembled light distribution.
Not reportedTaxonDirection
Verbatim
e0“the distribution pattern of fruit quality in the canopy was similar to that of light distribution.”
Claim · model-written summary
At a given fruiting position, quality was higher at 85° and 45° than at 65°, without a significant difference.
- Organ / stage
- same fruiting parte0
- Treatment
- 85° and 45°e0
- Outcome
- fruit qualitye0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- 65°e0
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“In the same fruiting part, the fruit quality was higher at 85° and 45° than at 65° and slightly higher at 85° than at 45°, but the difference was not significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit quality at 85° was slightly higher than at 45°, without a significant difference.
Not reportedTaxon
Verbatim
e0“In the same fruiting part, the fruit quality was higher at 85° and 45° than at 65° and slightly higher at 85° than at 45°, but the difference was not significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
Branch angle treatments affected fruit weight, flesh firmness, soluble solids and titratable acid more significantly.
- Treatment
- different main branch opening angle treatmentse0
- Outcome
- fruit weight, flesh firmness, soluble solids, and titratable acide0
Not reportedTaxonComparatorDirection
Verbatim
e0“The effects of different main branch opening angle treatments on the fruit weight, flesh firmness, soluble solids, and titratable acid were more significant.”
Claim · model-written summary
An 85° pulling angle increased light intensity across canopy layers.
- Taxon
- peach treesPrunus persicae0
- Treatment
- 85° pulling anglee0
- Outcome
- light intensity of the different canopy layerse0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 85° pulling angle effectively increased the light intensity of the different canopy layers of the peach trees and promoted the accumulation of nutrients.”
Claim · model-written summary
An 85° pulling angle promoted nutrient accumulation.
- Taxon
- peach treesPrunus persicae0
- Treatment
- 85° pulling anglee0
- Outcome
- accumulation of nutrientse0
- Direction
- promotede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The 85° pulling angle effectively increased the light intensity of the different canopy layers of the peach trees and promoted the accumulation of nutrients.”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend 85° as a peach shaping angle.
- Taxon
- peach treePrunus persicae0
- Treatment
- 85° pulling anglee0
- Outcome
- 85° pulling anglee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“An 85° pulling angle can be used as a more suitable pulling angle for peach tree shaping cultivation.”
The same questions in other papers
light · physiology: photosynthesis · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- negative
- negative
- negative
5 papers more in this group
See all 9 papers →light · growth · Prunus persica (peach)Positive and negative results
13 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- positive
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 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.