The effects of leaf removal and of modifying temperature set-points with solar radiation on tomato yields

Adams, Sally; Woodward, G. C.; Valdés, V. M.

doi:10.1080/14620316.2002.11511565

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The high deleafing treatment reported by Adams et al (2002) resulted in a lower final LAI (2.6) when compared with that from the current 'leaf removed' treatment (2.9), although the removal of old leaf did not have a significant effect on the yield. According to Adams et al (2002) tomato leaves at the bottom of the canopy were around 25% less efficient in terms of net photosynthesis when compared with young fully expanded leaves; however, other authors have 14 shown more dramatic losses with canopy height. Bolaños and Hsiao (1991) reported >70% losses in photosynthetic efficiency for tomato leaves as they aged from around 25 to 80 d-old.…”

Section: Effect Of the Leaf Removal Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The humidity control and CO 2 management were performed as described by Adams et al (2002). The aerial environment was monitored independently as reported by Adams et al (2002).…”

Section: Environmental Set-pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The plants were grown as a conventional long-season layered crop, although they were not 'stopped' at the end of the season, so that records of flowering and fruit set could continue to be made. Pollination, integrated pest management, mineral nutrition, manipulation of EC and irrigation were done as described by Adams et al (2002).…”

Section: General Plant Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The main reasons for the removal of these T 4 leaves are to prevent disease, to hasten fruit ripening, and to make the harvest easier (Heuvelink et al, 2005). Adams et al (2002) showed that when leaves were removed each week, up to two trusses above the ripening truss in a high-wire crop, fruits were warmer during the day and slightly cooler at night, and ripened on average 1.2 d earlier than fruit on plants on which leaves were removed up to two trusses below the ripening truss. These two leaf-removal treatments gave a similar pattern of yield, and there was no significant difference in the cumulative yields for the season.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, in a tomato canopy, the lower leaves have reduced photosynthetic efficiency (Adams et al, 2002;Bolaños and Hsiao, 1991;Xu et al, 1997). Similarly in pepper, on an annual basis, it has been found that the lower half of the crop made a 0.5% negative contribution to net photosynthesis (Dueck et al, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The effects of long-day lighting and removal of young leaves on tomato yield

Valdés

Woodward²,

Adams³

2010

The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Running head: Effects of daylength and leaf removal on tomato * Author for correspondence. SUMMARYWhile low intensity long-day (LD) lighting has been shown to enhance the growth of young plants under low light levels, the effect on the yield of a long-season glasshouse tomato crop has not been previously examined. LD were provided by the use of tungsten lamps (2.8 µmol m -2 s -1 at approx. 0.5 m from the ground) between 04.00 h to sunrise and from sunset until 20.00 h (GMT). LD lighting increased the leaf chlorophyll contents, and the numbers of flowers and fruits set per truss when the plants were young. However, this treatment did not affect the total yield of tomatoes.Different leaf removal treatments were applied within each glasshouse compartment.A previous experiment had shown that reducing the leaf area index (LAI) from 5.2 to 2.6, by removing old leaves, did not affect yields. It is also thought that the removal of young leaves reduces the total vegetative sink-strength and favours assimilate partitioning into fruit. Therefore, removal of young leaves could benefit yield. In the present experiment a third of the leaves were removed in March (those immediately below each truss) and subsequently every third leaf was removed at an early stage.This reduced the LAI from 4.1 to 2.9 and resulted in a loss of yield from 3 to 4 weeks after leaf removal until the end of the experiment, at which point there was an 8% loss of cumulative yield, due to a reduction in the average number of fruits set per truss and mean fruit weight. We postulate that light which would have been intercepted by young photosynthetically efficient leaves at the top of the canopy was intercepted instead by older leaves which were less efficient, reducing the net canopy In both studies increased chlorophyll contents were observed when growth was enhanced as a result of LD. Based on the response presented by Gabrielsen (1948), Hurd (1973 estimated that the observed increase in chlorophyll content could account for a 6% increase in photosynthesis under the conditions used

show abstract

Section: Effect Of the Leaf Removal Treatmentsmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…The humidity control and CO 2 management were performed as described by Adams et al (2002). The aerial environment was monitored independently as reported by Adams et al (2002).…”

Section: Environmental Set-pointsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: General Plant Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The effects of long-day lighting and removal of young leaves on tomato yield

Valdés

Woodward²,

Adams³

2010

The Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Tomato quality is more dependent on temperature than on photosynthetically active radiation

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: A greenhouse experiment was performed to study the effect of cumulative air temperature and photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) on tomato quality. Tomato plants were subjected to two different shading treatments causing a 30 and 50% reduction in incoming PAR respectively (plants were exposed to 70 and 50% of incoming PAR respectively). Control plants (exposed to 100% of incoming PAR) were also included in the experiment. The experiment was carried out under unheated greenhouse conditions. To minimise the dependence of temperature on PAR, only a small area inside a large greenhouse was shaded, thereby allowing air currents to homogenise temperature all over the enclosure. Parameters of tomato quality were correlated with cumulative temperature (T cum ) and cumulative PAR (PAR cum ) for a period of 45 days before harvest.

show abstract