Re: [apple-crop] Late summer drop and fruit size

2014-01-17 Thread Jon Clements
Bonjour Vincent! Désolé, mais peut-être que vous devriez vous en tenir à
l'entomologie et de la pathologie et de laisser la recherche horticole très
dur très important pour les vrais experts! :-)


On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Vincent Philion vincent.phil...@irda.qc.ca
 wrote:

 Hello, sorry for the delay.

 Yes, correct. Crop load influenced fruit weight notwithstanding ReTain.
 Fruits left on tree at harvest were more numerous and larger when treated
 with Retain. Fruits were up to 56g larger (148g vs 92g) depending on the
 specifics of the ReTain application.

 What I also found interesting was that the average fruit pressure of
 retain treated fruit significantly dropped for fruit left on the trees. As
 if the fruit stuck to the tree with Retain, and continued to grow but got
 softer.

  The Brix index was also influenced by the number of fruits on the tree:
 lower Brix on trees with more fruit. Retain also increased sugar content.

 Not much else to report.

 I’m not usually into physiology. This was a “accidental” project for us!

 Vincent

 On 14janv., 2014, at 16:41, David Kollas kol...@sbcglobal.net wrote:


 Vincent:

 As I understand your most recent explanation, both the untreated and the
 ReTain-treated trees
 produced greater fruit size at harvest if they were borne on trees most
 heavily-set at start of
 experiment. And that the ReTain treated trees showed a greater
 size/initial number of fruit than did the
 untreated.  If the difference in fruit size for treated versus untreated
 is small, I would not be much
 bothered by it. Can you tell us how much different they were?

 David Kollas

 On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:26 PM, Vincent Philion vincent.phil...@irda.qc.ca
 wrote:

 Hello!

 Thank you all for your input!

 I did not explain why I was looking at drop and fruit size: it was an
 experiment on the use of ReTain.

 In the end I’m not sure I can pinpoint the reason this increased fruit
 size on trees with more apples (notwithstanding ReTain), but your input
 underlined that a number of variables can be involved! I liked Duane’s idea.

 If you’re curious, the report will read: ReTain Treatments significantly
 increased harvested McIntosh yield as compared to the control (p0.0001).
  Average fruit size at harvest was proportional to the total number
 of fruits on the trees present at the start of the experiment (p=0.01) and
 fruits treated with ReTain were larger than in the control (p=0.02).

 The effect of ReTain on harvest was expected (drop prevention) but the
 effect on fruit size was undetectable if the model was not adjusted to the
 initial crop load (thus my question)

 So the next question is now: why are ReTain treated fruits bigger than
 untreated fruit at harvest?

 bye for now,

 Vincent


 On 14janv., 2014, at 10:06, Duane Greene dgre...@pssci.umass.edu wrote:


 ___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop



 ___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop




-- 
Jon Clements
aka 'Mr Honeycrisp'
UMass Cold Spring Orchard
393 Sabin St.
Belchertown, MA  01007
413-478-7219
umassfruit.com
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop


Re: [apple-crop] Late summer drop and fruit size

2014-01-17 Thread maurice tougas
Jon, google translate est votre meilleur femme de chances de Québec!


On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:02 PM, Vincent Philion vincent.phil...@irda.qc.ca
 wrote:

 For once, I actually agree with you Jon. ;-)

 I don’t have your skills and talent, so I know I should stick to the easy
 topics like pathology that my simple mind can understand.

 So from your friendly comment I conclude that all this was all quite
 predictable? Good.

 My only goal here was to confirm that this data made sense. If it does,
 I’m happy.

 I don’t intend to publish in Nature.  I rely on you for that. ;-)

 have a nice weekend!


 PS = You should come up here and teach us. Your French level is not bad!
 Enough to flirt with the women and order beer. The essential stuff.

 Vincent


 On 17janv., 2014, at 15:21, Jon Clements jon.cleme...@umass.edu wrote:

 Bonjour Vincent! Désolé, mais peut-être que vous devriez vous en tenir à
 l'entomologie et de la pathologie et de laisser la recherche horticole très
 dur très important pour les vrais experts! :-)


 On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 9:34 PM, Vincent Philion 
 vincent.phil...@irda.qc.ca wrote:

 Hello, sorry for the delay.

 Yes, correct. Crop load influenced fruit weight notwithstanding ReTain.
 Fruits left on tree at harvest were more numerous and larger when treated
 with Retain. Fruits were up to 56g larger (148g vs 92g) depending on the
 specifics of the ReTain application.

 What I also found interesting was that the average fruit pressure of
 retain treated fruit significantly dropped for fruit left on the trees. As
 if the fruit stuck to the tree with Retain, and continued to grow but got
 softer.

  The Brix index was also influenced by the number of fruits on the tree:
 lower Brix on trees with more fruit. Retain also increased sugar content.

 Not much else to report.

 I’m not usually into physiology. This was a “accidental” project for us!

 Vincent

 On 14janv., 2014, at 16:41, David Kollas kol...@sbcglobal.net wrote:


 Vincent:

 As I understand your most recent explanation, both the untreated and the
 ReTain-treated trees
 produced greater fruit size at harvest if they were borne on trees most
 heavily-set at start of
 experiment. And that the ReTain treated trees showed a greater
 size/initial number of fruit than did the
 untreated.  If the difference in fruit size for treated versus untreated
 is small, I would not be much
 bothered by it. Can you tell us how much different they were?

 David Kollas

 On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:26 PM, Vincent Philion vincent.phil...@irda.qc.ca
 wrote:

 Hello!

 Thank you all for your input!

 I did not explain why I was looking at drop and fruit size: it was an
 experiment on the use of ReTain.

 In the end I’m not sure I can pinpoint the reason this increased fruit
 size on trees with more apples (notwithstanding ReTain), but your input
 underlined that a number of variables can be involved! I liked Duane’s idea.

 If you’re curious, the report will read: ReTain Treatments significantly
 increased harvested McIntosh yield as compared to the control (p0.0001).
  Average fruit size at harvest was proportional to the total number
 of fruits on the trees present at the start of the experiment (p=0.01) and
 fruits treated with ReTain were larger than in the control (p=0.02).

 The effect of ReTain on harvest was expected (drop prevention) but the
 effect on fruit size was undetectable if the model was not adjusted to the
 initial crop load (thus my question)

 So the next question is now: why are ReTain treated fruits bigger than
 untreated fruit at harvest?

 bye for now,

 Vincent


 On 14janv., 2014, at 10:06, Duane Greene dgre...@pssci.umass.edu wrote:


 ___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop



 ___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop




 --
 Jon Clements
 aka 'Mr Honeycrisp'
 UMass Cold Spring Orchard
 393 Sabin St.
 Belchertown, MA  01007
 413-478-7219
 umassfruit.com
  ___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop



 ___
 apple-crop mailing list
 apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
 http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop




-- 
Maurice Tougas
Tougas Family Farm
Northborough,MA 01532
508-450-0844
___
apple-crop mailing list
apple-crop@virtualorchard.net
http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop