↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating Spatially Resolved Influence of Soil and Tree Water Status on Quality of European Plum Grown in Semi-humid Climate

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (55th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
35 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evaluating Spatially Resolved Influence of Soil and Tree Water Status on Quality of European Plum Grown in Semi-humid Climate
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2017.01053
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jana Käthner, Alon Ben-Gal, Robin Gebbers, Aviva Peeters, Werner B. Herppich, Manuela Zude-Sasse

Abstract

In orchards, the variations of fruit quality and its determinants are crucial for resource effective measures. In the present study, a drip-irrigated plum production (Prunus domestica L. "Tophit plus"/Wavit) located in a semi-humid climate was studied. Analysis of the apparent electrical conductivity (ECa) of soil showed spatial patterns of sand lenses in the orchard. Water status of sample trees was measured instantaneously by means of leaf water potential, Ψleaf [MPa], and for all trees by thermal imaging of canopies and calculation of the crop water stress index (CWSI). Methods for determining CWSI were evaluated. A CWSI approach calculating canopy and reference temperatures from the histogram of pixels from each image itself was found to suit the experimental conditions. Soil ECa showed no correlation with specific leaf area ratio and cumulative water use efficiency (WUEc) derived from the crop load. The fruit quality, however, was influenced by physiological drought stress in trees with high crop load and, resulting (too) high WUEc, when fruit driven water demand was not met. As indicated by analysis of variance, neither ECa nor the instantaneous CWSI could be used as predictors of fruit quality, while the interaction of CWSI and WUEc did succeed in indicating significant differences. Consequently, both WUEc and CWSI should be integrated in irrigation scheduling for positive impact on fruit quality.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 35 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 26%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 20%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 14 40%
Environmental Science 5 14%
Engineering 3 9%
Psychology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 August 2020.
All research outputs
#13,868,046
of 22,985,065 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#7,191
of 20,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,866
of 316,849 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#251
of 571 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,985,065 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 20,444 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 316,849 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 571 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.