Fruit weight is related to ovary weight in olive (Olea europaea L.)

Rosati, A.; Zipanćič, Marija; Caporali, Silvia; Padula, G.

doi:10.1016/j.scienta.2009.05.034

Cited by 50 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, proportionality among the ovary and other flower parts was found both within trees (Cuevas & Polito, 2004) and between cultivars (Rosati et al, 2009). Ovary size depends mostly on cell number rather than size, both across and within cultivars (Rosati et al, 2011a).…”

Section: Ovary Vs Fruit Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…Mature fruit size correlates with flower and, particularly, ovary size at bloom (Rosati et al, 2009). This is true for both the mesocarp and the endocarp independently, though, as stated above, the mesocarp grows proportionally more: the endocarp volume in the fruit is about 4000 times greater than its volume in the ovary, while the same ratio is about 800 for the endocarp (Rosati et al, 2012).…”

Section: Ovary Vs Fruit Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…In fact, the mature fruit has about 8.5 times the cell number compared to the ovary, while cell size is about 250 times greater (Rapoport et al, 2004). Fruit weight is about 2000 (from 1000 to 4000) times greater than ovary weight at bloom (Rosati et al, 2009). However, from the ovary to the mature fruit, the mesocarp grows much more than the endocarp (Rosati et al, 2012), probably due to its longer growth period (i.e.…”

Section: Ovary Vs Fruit Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In fact, as described above, fruit size differences are related to ovary size differences among cultivars. Large-fruited cultivars tend to have bigger flowers, not just ovaries (Rosati et al, 2009). This implies greater energetic costs for the same number of flowers, and thus greater pistil abortion, which in fact tends to be higher in larger-fruited cultivars (Morettini, 1939;Magherini, 1971;Acebedo, 2000;Rosati et al, 2011b).…”

Section: Ovary (Or Pistil) Abortionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rugini and Pannelli (1993) showed that fruit set increases when shoot development is mechanically or chemically slowed down, further supporting the hypothesis that competition drives fruit set. Given that resource availability affects fruit set, largefruited cultivars, having larger ovaries/flowers (Rosati et al, 2009), which need more resources, set fewer fruits, though total fruit mass is similar (Rosati et al, 2010). This suggests compensation between fruit number and size.…”

Section: Fruit Setmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Floral Biology: Implications for Fruit Characteristics and Yield

Rosati¹,

Caporali²,

Paoletti³

2012

Olive Germplasm - The Olive Cultivation, Table Olive and Olive Oil Industry in Italy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Ovary Vs Fruit Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: Ovary Vs Fruit Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Ovary Vs Fruit Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Ovary (Or Pistil) Abortionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Fruit Setmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Floral Biology: Implications for Fruit Characteristics and Yield

Rosati¹,

Caporali²,

Paoletti³

2012

Olive Germplasm - The Olive Cultivation, Table Olive and Olive Oil Industry in Italy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revisiting source versus sink limitations of wheat yield during grain filling

Rosati,

Benincasa

2023

Agronomy Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To further increase wheat (Triticum spp.) yield, we need to understand whether it is source or sink limited. Earlier papers suggested that wheat yield is source limited in modern cultivars, including during the grain filling stage. Many recent papers support this interpretation, showing that yield is strongly related to environmental conditions that affect source capacity. In contrast to this, other authors working on source‐sink manipulations have concluded that wheat yield is only or predominantly sink limited during grain filling. The objective of this forum paper was to review this contrasting literature and revisit the assumptions and the interpretation of the results. We found that the arguments for a major sink limitation to wheat yield during grain filling arose from a common approach to quantitatively assess the degree of source‐sink limitations, based on relativizing the change in grain weight (in response to source‐sink manipulations) to the estimated change in source availability per grain. We show that the estimated changes in source availability with source manipulations are often overestimated in the literature, thus underestimating source limitations. Most importantly, we discuss why relativizing the change in grain weight to the estimated change in source availability biases the interpretation of source vs. sink limitations. We conclude that wheat yield is mostly source limited during grain filling, and thus strongly dependent on environmental (including agronomic) conditions. A new model to interpret wheat yield limitations is proposed, describing yield as source limited during the whole crop cycle, including during grain filling.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

show abstract