Search Results

You are looking at 51 - 60 of 99 items for :

  • "cluster weight" x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All
Free access

Patsy E. Wilson, Douglas D. Archbold, Joseph G. Masabni, and S. Kaan Kurtural

, in both years, there was no unmarketable fruit. All treatments were harvested on the same date. Harvest date was determined by the cooperating winery based on a target juice pH of 3.5. Average cluster weight was calculated by dividing yield by cluster

Free access

S. Kaan Kurtural, Lydia F. Wessner, and Geoffrey Dervishian

displaying greater than 30% disease damage, insect herbivory or sunburn damage). However, in both years, there was no unmarketable fruit. Average cluster weight was calculated by dividing fruit yield per vine by the number of clusters harvested per vine

Full access

Madeline Wimmer, Beth Ann Workmaster, and Amaya Atucha

estimated from a subsample of 30 berries collected from six clusters within individual panels. The average cluster weight was estimated by dividing yield by total clusters per vine. Values for average number of berries per cluster were estimated by dividing

Full access

Justine E. Vanden Heuvel, Steven D. Lerch, Celine Coquard Lenerz, James M. Meyers, and Anna Katharine Mansfield

-Tronix, Fairmont, MN), and cluster number per vine was recorded. Average cluster weights were calculated by dividing yield by cluster number on a per vine basis. A random sample of 20 clusters per experimental unit was collected at harvest and stored at −40 °C

Free access

Pavel Pavloušek

Lednice na Moravě, Czech Republic. ‘Cerason’ is distinguished by a lower average cluster weight (265.04 g) and lower average berry weight (1.57) than ‘Lemberger’ ( Table 2 ). Significant differences were also found for all important berry and cluster

Free access

Carolina Uquillas, Eduardo Torres, Antonio Ibacache, and Bruno G. Defilippi

-Llay x during three years. The clusters of ‘Iniagrape-one’ are attractive, conical, of medium density, and large size ( Fig. 1 ). Without application of growth regulators, cluster weight ranged from 322 g to 723 g with an overall average 525 g. When GA

Open access

Renee T. Threlfall, John R. Clark, James N. Moore, and Justin R. Morris

per cultivar), and cluster weight (average of five clusters) for 2017–20 ( Table 1 ). Berry samples were taken before harvest, and harvest date was determined based on fruit composition of pH 3.4 to 3.6, titratable acidity of 0.6% to 0.75%, and soluble

Free access

Susana Boso Alonso, Virginia Alonso-Villaverde Pilar Gago, José L. Santiago, Mariá C. Martínez, and Emilio Rodriguez

0.35), cluster weight (0.36), cluster length (0.29), cluster width (0.34), total acidity (−0.30), and the yield (kilograms grape/vine) (0.32). A negative correlation was seen between total acidity and the majority of the other variables analyzed

Free access

Larry J. Bettiga

weighing the harvested clusters. Average cluster weight was calculated by dividing fruit yield by the number of clusters per vine. Ravaz index was calculated by dividing the fruit yield per vine by the dormant pruning weights ( Ravaz, 1911 ). Fruit

Free access

John R. Clark and James N. Moore

berry weight (average of 25 berries per cultivar), cluster weight (average of five clusters), and soluble solids (measured on juice extracted from a 25-berry sample) for all years except 2007, in which a late frost damaged the crop and data were not