FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W611726018> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W611726018 abstract "One red and one white cultivar of winegrapes grown in Southern Arizona was pruned to four different methods. The red cultivar was `Merlot' and the white was `Sauvignon Blanc'. The pruning methods were 2 bud spur, 4 bud spur, cane and basal buds only. The basal bud treatment was eliminated for `Sauvignon Blanc'. The 4 bud spur method resulted in significantly greater yield when compared to the other methods. Fruit produced from the basal bud only treatment resulted in fruit that was significantly greater in pH and acid content. The `Sauvignon Blanc' cultivar had significantly higher yield with cane pruning with no difference in fruit quality. Introduction Arizona climate characteristics affect grapevine growth habits and subsequently production and grape berry quality characters. While the differences in climate do occur in contrast to other grape growing districts of the world, yield and berry quality characters have not been studied in relation to growth characteristics. In addition it is not clear how grapevines respond to various pruning methods in relationship to yield and fruit quality characters. Arizona climate is one where spring frosts are a hazard in some years, resulting in reduced yields from freezing death of shoots or primary buds. As a consequence secondary buds provide total vine production which is generally 1/3 to 1/2 of the primary bud potential production. Growers using the spur pruning method have been leaving 4 bud spurs, to offset the potential loss of production resulting from freeze or frost damage. Another method of leaving additional buds would be to use the cane system of pruning. The concept of leaving excess buds can result in rather high yields which could be detrimental to vine growth and development. The objective of this experiment was to determine the effect of various pruning methods on the production and berry quality of `Merlot' and `Sauvignon Blanc' cultivars under Arizona high desert climatic conditions. Methods During the winter (pruning season) and growing season of 1994 and 1995, various pruning methods were established on the cultivars 'Merlot' (1994) and `Sauvignon Blanc' (1995) in order to determine the best method to prune vines in relation to yield and berry quality characteristics. `Merlot' trials were established in the Terra Rosa Vineyard near Elgin while the `Sauvignon Blanc' trials were established in the Dos Cabezas Vineyard near Willcox. The `Merlot' vines were about 4 years old but demonstrated good vigor. The `Sauvignon Blanc' vines were approximately 12 years old with excellent vigor characteristics. Pruning treatments were as follows: 108 Pruning Methods Description -2 Bud Spur 14 spurs /vine -4 Bud Spur 14 spurs /vine Cane 14 buds /cane (2 canes /vine) Basal Buds No spurs All of the above pruning methods were utilized in the ` Merlot' trial. The basal bud treatment was not utilized in the `Sauvignon Blanc' trial, instead the cane pruned treatment consisted of 4 or 5 canes with 12 -14 buds per cane. The experimental design was completely random with four reps consisting of one vine per plot. Data collected included pruning weight, yield per vine, clusters per vine, cluster weight, and berry quality characteristics which included a must analysis consisting of pH, Brix and acid expressed as per cent tartaric. Results The data were collected for only one year for each trial due to vine loss in the Terra Rosa Vineyard and frost damage and deer depredation in the Dos Cabezas Vineyard. For the ' Merlot' trial, the amount of wood removed during pruning (pruning weights) (Table 1), was less for the 4 bud spur pruning method when compared to the other methods. This was to be expected. Also, the four bud method resulted in the greatest yield and the most clusters per vine which is directly related to the number of buds retained during pruning. There was very little difference in yield for the 2 bud spur, cane or basal bud pruning methods. The largest clusters occured on vines from the two bud spur method (normal method) while the smallest clusters were from the 4 bud spur treatment. Generally, analysis indicated the fruit produced solely from basal buds had a high pH and acid content when compared to fruit produced from primary buds on a cane (other treatments) (Table 2). The `Sauvignon Blanc' trial produced similar results with the exception that the cane pruning method produced the highest yields while the 2 bud spur treatment produced the lowest (Table 3). In addition, the 2 bud spur method resulted in the lowest number and smallest clusters. There was no significant difference in Brix content of the grapes (Table 4) from any pruning method. Summary and Conclusions The ' Merlot' pruning trial resulted in expected results in that the greater number of primary buds left for fruit production (4 bud spur method) the greater the yield. Surprisingly this heavy yield did not affect cluster size (weight) or berry chemical content. However, in all probability this was the first true crop from these vines, which means that the vines contained enough stored carbohydrates from previous years to properly mature a large crop. Subsequent yearly observations indicated that these vines were drained of carbohydrates resulting in poor crops or vine death. This condition was not observed with the other pruning methods. The 4 bud spur treatment is currently being used in several vineyards in the Elgin area. Based on these results this method should not be used, due to overcropping and vine weaking. The 2 bud spur method was superior to cane pruning in terms of yield and quality of clusters. The basal bud treatment revealed some very interesting information from a fruit quality standpoint, in that grapes were high in pH and acid. This would explain why young vines would have some inferior quality fruit and should alert growers that basal buds should not be left for fruiting. There should be a balance between fruit produced and shoot growth." @default.
• W611726018 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W611726018 creator A5042430278 @default.
• W611726018 date "1998-09-01" @default.
• W611726018 modified "2023-09-27" @default.
• W611726018 title "Pruning Methods Affect Yield and Fruit Quality of 'Merlot' and 'Sauvignon Blanc' Grapevines" @default.
• W611726018 hasPublicationYear "1998" @default.
• W611726018 type Work @default.
• W611726018 sameAs 611726018 @default.
• W611726018 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W611726018 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W611726018 hasAuthorship W611726018A5042430278 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C108010975 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C134121241 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C144027150 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C191897082 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C197321923 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C21410773 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C27414487 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C2776034682 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C2776821462 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C2777108408 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C2781214258 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C59822182 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C81693640 @default.
• W611726018 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C108010975 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C134121241 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C144027150 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C191897082 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C192562407 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C197321923 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C21410773 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C27414487 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C2776034682 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C2776821462 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C2777108408 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C2781214258 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C55493867 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C59822182 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C81693640 @default.
• W611726018 hasConceptScore W611726018C86803240 @default.
• W611726018 hasLocation W6117260181 @default.
• W611726018 hasOpenAccess W611726018 @default.
• W611726018 hasPrimaryLocation W6117260181 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W1495804242 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W1824849717 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2011295413 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2023759046 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2181478597 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W221675387 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2228525234 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W228248785 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2344712687 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2463749104 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2540114688 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2765165678 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2774307324 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W285621123 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2899029165 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2998702066 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W3009432837 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W3033573916 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W3137488242 @default.
• W611726018 hasRelatedWork W2189025681 @default.
• W611726018 isParatext "false" @default.
• W611726018 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W611726018 magId "611726018" @default.
• W611726018 workType "article" @default.