1973
DOI: 10.1080/00221589.1973.11514537
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative studies on physiological and morphological features of bearing and non-bearing spurs of the apple tree. I. Changes in starch content during growth

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Starch decreased just before harvest in 2-year-old bark and wood and spurs of bearing trees, but to a lesser extent, or not at all, in nonbearing trees. In apple spurs from nonbearing trees, starch was significantly higher than in those from bearing trees during the summer months for 3 consecutive years (Grochowska, 1973). In mandarin, starch levels in leaves, branches, trunk, and roots were at least twice as high in nonbearing than bearing trees.…”
Section: Environmental Developmental and Management Effects On Rootmentioning
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Starch decreased just before harvest in 2-year-old bark and wood and spurs of bearing trees, but to a lesser extent, or not at all, in nonbearing trees. In apple spurs from nonbearing trees, starch was significantly higher than in those from bearing trees during the summer months for 3 consecutive years (Grochowska, 1973). In mandarin, starch levels in leaves, branches, trunk, and roots were at least twice as high in nonbearing than bearing trees.…”
Section: Environmental Developmental and Management Effects On Rootmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…For some deciduous fruit tree and vine crops, seasonal changes in nonstructural carbohydrates have been extensively characterized, especially in apple (Beattie, 1948;Chong, 1971;Chong andTaper, 1971a, 1971b;Grochowska, 1973;Hansen, 1967;Hansen and Grauslund, 1973;Hooker, 1920;Kandiah, 1979Kandiah, , 1979bLoescher et al, 1982;Mochizuki and Hanada, 1956;Murneek, 1933;Priestley, 1960Priestley, , 1964Priestley, , 1981Proebsting, 1925;Rao and Berry, 1940;Taper and Liu, 1969;Traub, 1927;Whetter and Taper, 1963) and in grape (Bains et al, 1981;Eifert and Eifert, 1963;Kliewer, 1965;Kliewer, 1967;Kliewer and Nassar, 1966;Marutyan, 1962;Pickett and Cowart, 1941;Scholefield et al, 1978;Winkler, 1929;Winkler and Williams, 1938;Winkler and Williams, 1945). Other species studied include peach (Breen, 1975;Dowler and King, 1966;Lasheen and Chaplin, 1977;Rohrbach and Luepschen, 1968;Rom and Ferree, 1985;Ryugo and Davis, 1959;Stassen et al, 1981), pear (Cameron, 1923;…”
Section: Location Of Carbohydrate Reservesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Starch levels in bark, wood, spurs, roots and trunk were higher in non-bearing than in bearing prune trees throughout the year, except at the time of the first growth flush (Davis 1931). Starch in apple spurs from non-bearing trees was significantly higher than in those from bearing trees during the summer months for 3 consecutive years (Grochowska 1973). These and sitnilar reports (Crane and Al-Shalan 1977, Hooker 1920, Lenz and Kuntzel 1974, Ryugo et al 1977 indicate that the presence of reproductive sinks depresses the amount of non-structural carbohydrates stored in vegetative tissues.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…The presence of fruit on spurs results in a decrease of the nucleic acid content and increase of the nucleohistone and this has a negative effect on the flower bud differentiation (18,19). Fruits reduce also the starch content in the fifth to sixth week after full bloom (48). According to this author the high starch content in the spurs cannot be regarded as a direct cause for flower bud initiation, but only as an excellent and rapid indicator of the direction of metabolic processes resulting from the low amounts of auxin and gibberellins in the surrounding tissues.…”
Section: Cytochemical Changesmentioning
confidence: 99%