Abstract
One-year-old `Concord' grapevines ( Vitis labruscana Bailey) were fertigated with 0, 5, 10, 15, or 20 m m nitrogen by using a modified Hoagland's solution for 8 weeks during active vine growth in summer. Half of the vines at each N concentration were sprayed with 3% foliar urea twice in late September while the rest served as controls. After natural leaf fall, all the vines were overwintered in a cold room (2 to 4 °C). Four vines from each treatment were destructively sampled before budbreak for reserve N and carbohydrate analysis. The remaining vines were supplied with either no N or sufficient N (10 m m N) from 2 weeks before bloom to 1 month after bloom. All the vines were destructively harvested at 1 month after bloom. Total amount of N in dormant vines increased with increasing N fertigation concentration. Total nonstructural carbohydrates (TNC) increased with increasing N fertigation concentration from 0 to 10 m m , and then leveled off with further rises in N supply. Foliar urea application increased total N but decreased TNC of dormant vines at each given N fertigation level. When no N was provided during the regrowth period, vine total leaf area, fruit yield, and total dry weight increased with increasing N supply from fertigation the previous year. Vines sprayed with foliar urea the previous fall produced a larger total leaf area, a higher yield, and a higher total vine dry weight at each given N fertigation concentration. Providing vines with sufficient N during the regrowth period significantly increased total leaf area, fruit yield, and vine total dry weight across the previous N fertigation concentrations, but vines sprayed with foliar urea still had a larger leaf area, a higher yield, and a higher total vine dry weight at each given N fertigation concentration. Therefore, we conclude that both vegetative growth and fruiting of young `Concord' vines are largely determined by reserve nitrogen, not by reserve carbohydrates, and that current-season N supply plays a very important role in sustaining vine growth and development, especially fruit growth.
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 8
Claim · model-written summary
Dormant vine total nitrogen rose with prior nitrogen fertigation.
- Treatment
- N fertigation concentratione0
- Outcome
- Total amount of N in dormant vinese0
- Direction
- increasede0
VitisNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total amount of N in dormant vines increased with increasing N fertigation concentration”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Dormant vine nonstructural carbohydrates rose as fertigation increased from 0 to 10 m m, then plateaued.
- Treatment
- N fertigation concentratione0
- Outcome
- Total nonstructural carbohydrates (TNC)e0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Value
- 0 to 10 m me0
- Qualifier
- then leveled offe0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Total nonstructural carbohydrates (TNC) increased with increasing N fertigation concentration from 0 to 10 m m , and then leveled off with further rises in N supply”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar urea increased dormant vine total nitrogen.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar urea application increased total N but decreased TNC of dormant vines at each given N fertigation level”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Foliar urea decreased dormant vine TNC.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Foliar urea application increased total N but decreased TNC of dormant vines at each given N fertigation level”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Without current nitrogen, prior fertigation raised total leaf area, yield and total dry weight.
- Treatment
- N supply from fertigation the previous yeare0
- Outcome
- vine total leaf area, fruit yield, and total dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
- Qualifier
- no N was provided during the regrowth periode0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“When no N was provided during the regrowth period, vine total leaf area, fruit yield, and total dry weight increased with increasing N supply from fertigation the previous year”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Prior autumn foliar urea raised leaf area, yield and dry weight at each fertigation rate.
- Treatment
- foliar urea the previous falle0
- Outcome
- total leaf area, a higher yield, and a higher total vine dry weighte0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Vines sprayed with foliar urea the previous fall produced a larger total leaf area, a higher yield, and a higher total vine dry weight at each given N fertigation concentration”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Current nitrogen significantly raised leaf area, fruit yield and total dry weight.
- Treatment
- sufficient N during the regrowth periode0
- Outcome
- total leaf area, fruit yield, and vine total dry weighte0
- Direction
- increasede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Providing vines with sufficient N during the regrowth period significantly increased total leaf area, fruit yield, and vine total dry weight”
t0“Grapevines”
Claim · model-written summary
Reserve nitrogen was interpreted as the main determinant of young-vine growth and fruiting.
- Compound
- reserve nitrogene0
- Outcome
- vegetative growth and fruitinge0
- Qualifier
- not by reserve carbohydratese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“both vegetative growth and fruiting of young `Concord' vines are largely determined by reserve nitrogen, not by reserve carbohydrates”
t0“Grapevines”
The same questions in other papers
nitrogen · yield · VitisResults differ
24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- negative
- no effect
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 papers →fertilization · yield · VitisResults differ
96 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- no effect
- negative
103 papers more in this group
See all 107 papers →nitrogen · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →nitrogen · nutrient: content · VitisPositive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
9 papers more in this group
See all 13 papers →application · nutrient: content · VitisPositive and negative results
34 papers in the same direction as this paper · 2 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- no effect
- positive
33 papers more in this group
See all 37 papers →application · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 34 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
35 papers more in this group
See all 39 papers →fertilization · quality: sugar starch · VitisPositive and negative results
31 papers in the same direction as this paper · 8 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
36 papers more in this group
See all 40 papers →application · yield · VitisPositive and negative results
79 papers in the same direction as this paper · 6 in the opposite direction · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- negative
- negative
83 papers more in this group
See all 87 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.