Search Results

You are looking at 81 - 90 of 164 items for :

  • "canopy volume" x
  • Refine by Access: User-accessible Content x
Clear All
Free access

Peter C. Andersen and Brent V. Brodbeck

r 2 . Yield/m 2 canopy area was calculated in 2010, 2012, and 2014 as yield/tree cross-sectional area. Tree canopy volume was calculated using the equation for one half of an oblate spheroid (4/6 π r 2 h ) where r is the average tree cross

Free access

Wendy L. Wilber and Jeffrey G. Williamson

fertilizer rate (fertilizer analyses combined) are reported for each cultivar independently. For leaf nutrient content, the effects of fertilizer analysis and rate are shown for each cultivar. Vegetative growth. Canopy volume for both cultivars

Free access

Luis Rallo, Diego Barranco, Raúl de la Rosa, and Lorenzo León

consequence, the vigor of ‘Chiquitita’ in terms of canopy volume remained ≈60% to 70% of ‘Arbequina’ across years ( Table 2 ). ‘Chiquitita’ showed a compact and weeping habit of growth with dense canopy and branches trending downward with crop so that canopy

Free access

Godfrey P. Miles, Ed Stover, Chandrika Ramadugu, Manjunath L. Keremane, and Richard F. Lee

commercial planting of Citrus . To maintain high ACP pressure and maximize challenge by C Las, no insecticides were applied, and high ACP populations were apparent year round. Growth measurements. Tree height, canopy width, tree canopy volume (TCV), trunk

Free access

François Mademba-Sy, Zacharie Lemerre-Desprez, and Stéphane Lebegin

line (D line ); 2) canopy diameter perpendicular to the planting line (D perp ); 3) trunk diameter at 10 cm above the level of the graft; 4) trunk diameter at 10 cm below the level of the graft; and 5) tree height (H). Canopy volume was calculated using

Free access

John A. Menge, Greg W. Douhan, Brandon McKee, Elinor Pond, Gary S. Bender, and Ben Faber

Luis Obispo Counties and Southern production zones included San Diego, Orange, and Riverside Counties. The variables tested were tree size (canopy volume), tree rating (for root rot resistance), salt rating, and yield. A separate analysis of each

Full access

Louise Ferguson and Sergio Castro Garcia

these groves is given in Table 2 . In 2008, the tree canopies measured 18 × 16 × 13 ft, and when pruned 3 ft from the ground had an average canopy volume of 2912 ft 3 . When mechanically pruned in a 3-year cycle in which the east side of the row was

Free access

Nicole L. Russo, Terence L. Robinson, Gennaro Fazio, and Herb S. Aldwinckle

the end of the experiment (Nov. 2006), tree survival, tree circumference, tree height, canopy width in two compass directions, and number of root suckers per tree were recorded. Canopy volume was calculated assuming a conical canopy shape. The distance

Free access

Fumiomi Takeda and Penelope Perkins-Veazie

microclimate variations in high tunnels throughout the growing season or as plant canopy volume increases. More information is needed about the benefits of high tunnel cropping systems and new production technologies for environmental manipulation to improve

Free access

Richard C. Beeson

. These were then multiplied to calculate a canopy volume [growth index (GI)]. Root ball volume was measured by first carefully removing the container substrate to a point of visible root tips. The remaining undisturbed root ball was then enclosed in a