Using concepts of shoot growth and architecture to understand and predict responses of peach trees to pruning

International audienceOne definition of horticulture is "the art of cultivating garden plants" and pruning is a horticultural practice that is traditionally approached as more of an art than a science. This is largely because of the complexity of tree growth and development and a lack of general understanding and appreciation about the processes involved in governing shoot and tree growth and development. However recent tree architectural studies have provided systematic analyses of the shoot growth and statistical and dynamic simulation models have been developed that predict tree development and responses to pruning based on scientific concepts. These concepts include apical dominance (and its subcomponents; correlative inhibition, apical control and shoot epinasty); prolepsis and syllepsis; preformation and neoformation; epicormic shoot formation and plastochron (leaf emergence rates). In this paper we will discuss how many of these concepts can be combined with hidden semi-Markov chain models of shoot bud fates and a simulation model of source-sink interactions in peach trees (L-PEACH) to understand and predict natural development of peach trees and their responses to pruning. The results of these modeling efforts help explain the architectural and physiological basis of several common, empirically-based pruning systems used in California. These concepts also provide an understanding of the limitations of relying primarily on the use of pruning to control size of trees growing on commonly used invigorating rootstocks. This research demonstrates how computer simulation modeling can be used to test and analyze interactions between environmental factors and management practices in determining patterns of tree growth and development

Howard walnut trees can be brought into bearing without annual pruning

In traditionally managed Howard walnut orchards, trees are pruned annually during the orchard development phase, an expensive operation in terms of labor and prunings disposal costs. Our observations and some prior research by others had suggested that pruning may not be necessary in walnut. In a trial of pruned and unpruned hedgerow trees over 8 years, beginning a year after planting, we documented canopy growth, tree height, yield and nut quality characteristics and also the effects of fruit removal. Pruning altered canopy shape but did not lead to increases in canopy development, yield or nut quality. Although fruit removal stimulated more vegetative growth in both the pruned and unpruned treatments, fruit removal did not result in an increase in midday canopy photosynthetically active radiation interception or cumulative yield when fruit removal was stopped after year 4. After 8 years, there were no significant differences in tree height, nut quality or cumulative yield among any of the treatments, which suggests that not pruning young Howard orchards could provide a net benefit to growers

Howard walnut trees can be brought into bearing without annual pruning

In traditionally managed Howard walnut orchards, trees are pruned annually during the orchard development phase, an expensive operation in terms of labor and prunings disposal costs. Our observations and some prior research by others had suggested that pruning may not be necessary in walnut. In a trial of pruned and unpruned hedgerow trees over 8 years, beginning a year after planting, we documented canopy growth, tree height, yield and nut quality characteristics and also the effects of fruit removal. Pruning altered canopy shape but did not lead to increases in canopy development, yield or nut quality. Although fruit removal stimulated more vegetative growth in both the pruned and unpruned treatments, fruit removal did not result in an increase in midday canopy photosynthetically active radiation interception or cumulative yield when fruit removal was stopped after year 4. After 8 years, there were no significant differences in tree height, nut quality or cumulative yield among any of the treatments, which suggests that not pruning young Howard orchards could provide a net benefit to growers

Howard walnut trees can be brought into bearing without annual pruning

In traditionally managed Howard walnut orchards, trees are pruned annually during the orchard development phase, an expensive operation in terms of labor and prunings disposal costs. Our observations and some prior research by others had suggested that pruning may not be necessary in walnut. In a trial of pruned and unpruned hedgerow trees over 8 years, beginning a year after planting, we documented canopy growth, tree height, yield and nut quality characteristics and also the effects of fruit removal. Pruning altered canopy shape but did not lead to increases in canopy development, yield or nut quality. Although fruit removal stimulated more vegetative growth in both the pruned and unpruned treatments, fruit removal did not result in an increase in midday canopy photosynthetically active radiation interception or cumulative yield when fruit removal was stopped after year 4. After 8 years, there were no significant differences in tree height, nut quality or cumulative yield among any of the treatments, which suggests that not pruning young Howard orchards could provide a net benefit to growers

Systematic analysis of branching patterns of three almond cultivars with different tree architectures

Different almond (Prunus dulcis) cultivars have been characterized by their contrasting shoot branching patterns; however, the differences between patterns have been difficult to quantify. This study aimed to model the branching patterns of 2-year-old proleptic shoots on three almond cultivars (Nonpareil, Aldrich, and Winters) representing different tree architectures. The effects of branching pattern on flowering were also studied. The branching patterns of shoots of different length categories were assessed by a single hidden semi-Markov model for each cultivar. The models identified zones of homogeneous branching composition along shoots and were used to extract the occurrence and number of nodes of the zones according to shoot length categories. The numbers of flower buds were also determined for each shoot length category in each cultivar. The models of branching patterns of 'Nonpareil' and 'Aldrich' were similar and differed from the 'Winters' model. 'Winters' shoots produced more zones, but some of the zones had similar characteristics as previous zones and thus appeared to be repeated. This cultivar also had more spurs and sylleptic shoots than the other cultivars. The occurrence and node number of the central zones decreased along with reduction in shoot length in all the cultivars. 'Aldrich' tended to have more flower buds than comparable-length shoots of the other two cultivars. This study provides a quantitative description of the shoot branching patterns of three important cultivars and explains how branching changes in relation to shoot length, whereas production of flower buds varies despite similar branching patterns. (Résumé d'auteur

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Alirocumab and cardiovascular outcomes after acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUN

Alirocumab and Cardiovascular Outcomes after Acute Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUN