Abstract
This study was conducted to determine to find out how long the grapevine cuttings of rootstock 41B should be submerged in order to increase adventitious root formation. The cuttings were placed in a big container filled with tap water in an order of 72, 48, 24 and 12 hours. Data obtained showed that generally water soaking increases rooting of the cuttings. Auxin applied afterwards also has a positive effect on inducing rooting. Keeping the cuttings submerged in water at least 24 hours and applying IBA afterwards resulted in the best results. Water soaking and/or IBA, however, did not improve the top growth of the cuttings.
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 5
Claim · model-written summary
Water soaking generally increased grapevine cutting rooting.
VitisNot reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“water soaking increases rooting of the cuttings”
t1“grapevine”
Claim · model-written summary
Auxin after soaking promoted rooting.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Auxin applied afterwards also has a positive effect on inducing rooting”
t1“grapevine”
Claim · model-written summary
At least 24 hours soaking followed by IBA gave the best rooting result.
- Treatment
- submerged in water at least 24 hours and applying IBA afterwardse0
- Outcome
- best resultse0
- Direction
- beste0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Keeping the cuttings submerged in water at least 24 hours and applying IBA afterwards resulted in the best results”
t1“grapevine”
Claim · model-written summary
Water soaking did not improve top growth.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water soaking and/or IBA, however, did not improve the top growth of the cuttings”
t1“grapevine”
Claim · model-written summary
IBA did not improve top growth.
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Water soaking and/or IBA, however, did not improve the top growth of the cuttings”
t1“grapevine”
The same questions in other papers
indole-3-butyric acid · growth · VitisResults differ
33 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
30 papers more in this group
See all 34 papers →class · growth · VitisPositive and negative results
19 papers in the same direction as this paper · 7 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
23 papers more in this group
See all 27 papers →application · growth · VitisPositive and negative results
36 papers in the same direction as this paper · 9 in the opposite direction
- negative
- no effect
- negative
42 papers more in this group
See all 46 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.