1960
DOI: 10.1111/j.1744-7348.1960.tb03546.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Bourse Shoot as a Factor in the Growth of Apple Fruits

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
26
1

Year Published

1980
1980
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 44 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This may be due to the greater sink effect of the fruiting shoot as a whole, compared to vegetative ones (Hansen 1977). Competition between bourse-shoot and fruit growth usually occurs early in the season and is detrimental to fruit-set but both phenomena are positively related later in the season (Abbott 1960;Ferree and Palmer 1982;Quinlan and Preston 1971). Indeed, an increased fruit sink demand stimulates photosynthesis of adjacent bourse and bourseshoot leaves (Hansen 1977) and, vice versa, an increased leaf area stimulates fruit growth and calcium content (Volz et al 1994).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…This may be due to the greater sink effect of the fruiting shoot as a whole, compared to vegetative ones (Hansen 1977). Competition between bourse-shoot and fruit growth usually occurs early in the season and is detrimental to fruit-set but both phenomena are positively related later in the season (Abbott 1960;Ferree and Palmer 1982;Quinlan and Preston 1971). Indeed, an increased fruit sink demand stimulates photosynthesis of adjacent bourse and bourseshoot leaves (Hansen 1977) and, vice versa, an increased leaf area stimulates fruit growth and calcium content (Volz et al 1994).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…In mature trees, however, an inverse relationship exists usually between yield and growth. Shoot growth, at certain stages of development, decreases apple fruit retention (Abbott, 1960;Quinlan and Preston, 1971), while heavy fruit load reduces trunk (Beattie, 1958;Boynton et al, 1950;Klein and Spieler, 1987a) or shoot growth within the same (Avery, 1970) or in the following year (Forshey, 1982;Rogers and Booth, 1964). In 'Starking', no correlation has been found between yield and shoot growth (Benson et al, 1957).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…Spurs mutants with short internodes and lateral branching have an enhanced precocity and a greater fruit-setting ability [23], [24], even though they tend to be alternate bearing [25]. Additional evidence of the impact of vegetative shoot length on terminal bud floral induction and fruit setting has been provided, supporting the assumption of within tree variation of fruit set [5] [26]. Describing the genetic variability of architectural traits among cultivars and progenies, [20] noticed several cultivars and hybrids that exhibited a fruit self-thinning behaviour.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%