Abstract
Growth and yield of ‘Misty’ and ‘Star’ southern highbush blueberry ( Vaccinium corymbosum hybrid) plants that were grown in pine bark culture were evaluated under several rates of granular or liquid fertilizers. Granular fertilizer resulted in larger canopy volumes and slightly greater annual fruit yield than liquid fertilizer. In 2003 and 2004, canopy growth increased linearly as fertilizer rate increased up to the highest rate tested [81 g nitrogen (N), 11.8 g phosphorus (P), and 44.6 g potassium (K) per plant per year]. Similarly, a positive relationship was found for fruit yield and fertilizer rate during all 3 years. Berry yield was positively correlated with canopy size, and there was no relationship between fertilizer rate and berry yield per canopy volume, indicating that yield and canopy volume increased proportionally with increased fertilizer rate. Mean ‘Star’ berry weight was greater for granular fertilizer treatments than for liquid fertilizer treatments, but mean berry weight of ‘Misty’ was unaffected by fertilizer form. At the end of the experiment, visual examination of eight plants excavated by hand indicated that root systems of blueberry plants were primarily located in the pine bark layer with very few roots penetrating into the underlying soil. Limited water and nutrient holding capacities of pine bark, coupled with frequent irrigations to the shallow root systems in pine bark culture, probably resulted in considerable nutrient leaching and a high fertilizer requirement.
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 9
Claim · model-written summary
Granular fertilizer produced larger canopies than liquid fertilizer.
Verbatim
e0“Granular fertilizer resulted in larger canopy volumes and slightly greater annual fruit yield than liquid fertilizer.”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Granular fertilizer slightly increased annual fruit yield over liquid fertilizer.
Verbatim
e0“Granular fertilizer resulted in larger canopy volumes and slightly greater annual fruit yield than liquid fertilizer.”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Canopy growth rose linearly with fertilizer rate up to the highest tested rate.
Verbatim
e0“canopy growth increased linearly as fertilizer rate increased up to the highest rate tested [81 g nitrogen (N), 11.8 g phosphorus (P), and 44.6 g potassium (K) per plant per year].”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Fruit yield was positively related to fertilizer rate in all three years.
Verbatim
e0“a positive relationship was found for fruit yield and fertilizer rate during all 3 years.”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Berry yield correlated positively with canopy size.
Verbatim
e0“Berry yield was positively correlated with canopy size”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Fertilizer rate was unrelated to berry yield per canopy volume.
Not reportedDirection
Verbatim
e0“there was no relationship between fertilizer rate and berry yield per canopy volume”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Star berries were heavier under granular than liquid fertilizer.
Verbatim
e0“Mean ‘Star’ berry weight was greater for granular fertilizer treatments than for liquid fertilizer treatments”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Misty berry weight was unaffected by fertilizer form.
Not reportedComparator
Verbatim
e0“mean berry weight of ‘Misty’ was unaffected by fertilizer form.”
t0“Blueberry”
Claim · model-written summary
Blueberry roots were mainly in pine bark, with few penetrating the soil.
Verbatim
e0“root systems of blueberry plants were primarily located in the pine bark layer with very few roots penetrating into the underlying soil.”
The same questions in other papers
fertilization · yield · VacciniumResults differ
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 11 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- no effect
21 papers more in this group
See all 25 papers →fertilization · growth · VacciniumPositive and negative results
15 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- positive
- no effect
- no effect
16 papers more in this group
See all 20 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.