Abstract
A 3-year study was done to compare the blossoming and harvesting date, fruit physical and chemical composition of six nectarine cultivars grown with High Density
Planting system under western Serbian conditions. A high variability among and within cultivars was found and significant differences were observed among them in all properties analyzed. Year-by-year variations were observed for blossoming and harvesting date, length of fruit growth, soluble solids content, fruit weight and fruit firmness. On the basis of evaluated data, the best fruit performance registered in ‘Caldesi 2000’ and ‘Syrio’ grown with HDP on heavy soil. Contrary, the poor fruit physico-chemical properties were observed in ‘Mayfire’, especially in ‘Nectared 4’. This evaluation may help to select a set of nectarine cultivars with better fruit quality attributes, which in our growing conditions might be indicated in ‘Caldesi 2000’, ‘Syrio’, somewhat ‘Weinberger’ and ‘Fantasia’.
References
Byrne D.H., 2003. Breeding peaches and nectarines for mild winter climate areas: state of the art and future directions. In: Proceedings of the First Mediterranean Peach Symposium, Marra F. Sottile F. (ed), Agrigento, Italy, 102–109.
Cantín C.M., Gogorcena Y., Moreno M.Á., 2010. Phenotypic diversity and relationships in fruit quality traits in peach and nectarine [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch] breeding progenies. Euphytica 171, 211–226.
Crisosto C.H., Slaughter D., Garner D., Boyd J., 2001. Stone fruit critical bruising thresholds. J. Am. Pom. Soc. 55, 76–81.
Crisosto C.H., Garner D., Crisosto G.M., Bowerman E., 2004. Increasing ‘Blackamber’ plum (Prunus salicina Lindley) consumer acceptance. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 34, 237–244.
Crisosto C.H., Crisosto G.M., 2005. Relationship between ripe soluble solids concentration (RSSC) and consumer acceptance of high and low acid melting flesh peach and nectarine [P. persica (L.) Batsch] cultivars. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 38, 239–246.
Day K., Lopez G., DeJong T., 2008. Using growing degree hours accumulated thirty days after bloom to predict peach and nectarine harvest date. Acta Hortic. 803, 163–166.
DeJong T.M., Goudriaan J., 1989. Modeling peach fruit growth and carbohydrate requirements: reevaluation of the double sigmoid growth pattern. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 114, 800–804.
DeJong T.M., 2005. Using physiological concepts to understand early spring temperature effects on fruit growth and anticipating fruit size problems at harvest. Summerfruit 3, 10–13.
Di Vaio C., Graziani G., Marra L., Cascone A., Ritieni A., 2008. Antioxidant capacities, carotenoids and polyphenols evaluation of fresh and refrigerated peach and nectarine cultivars from Italy. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 227, 1225–1231.
Dirlewanger E., Moing A., Rothan C., Svanella L., Pronier V., Guye A., Plomion C., Monet R., 1999. Mapping QTLs controlling fruit quality in peach [P. persica (L.) Batsch]. Theor. Appl. Genet. 98, 18–31.
Erdogan D., Guner M., Dursun E., Gezer I., 2003. Mechanical harvesting apricots. Biosyst. Eng. 85, 19–28.
Fleckinger J., 1945. Notations pheénologiques et représentations graphiques du dévelopment des bourgeons de Poirier. In: Congrés de Paris de l’Association francaise pour l’avancement des Sciencies, Paris, 118.
Hilaire C., 2003. The peach industry in France: state of art, research and development. In: First Mediterranean peach symposium, Marra F., Sottile F. (ed), Agrigento, Italy, 27–34.
Iglesias I., Echeverría G., 2009. Differential effect of cultivar and harvest date on nectarine colour, quality and consumer acceptance. Sci. Hortic. 120, 41–50.
Kramer A., Twigg B.A., 1966. Fundamentals of quality control for the food industry. In: 2nd ed., Avi Publishing, Westport, CT.
Lopez G., Johnson R.S., DeJong T.M., 2007. High spring temperatures decrease peach fruit size. Calif. Agr. 61, 31–34.
Maduako J.N., Faborode M.O., 1990. Some physical properties of cocoa pods in relation to primary processing. IFE J. Technol. 2, 1–7.
Milošević T., 1997. Special Topics in Fruit Growing. Faculty of Agronomy and Community for Fruits and Vegetables, Cacak-Belgrade, 135–179. (in Serbian)
Milosevic T., Milosevic N. 2010. Genetic variability and selection in natural populations of vineyard peach (Prunus persica ssp. vulgaris Mill.) in the Krusevac region (Central Serbia). Agrociencia 44, 297–309.
Mohsenin N.N., 1986. Physical properties of plant and animal materials. Gordon and Breach Press, New York, USA.
Mounzer O.H., Conejero W., Nicolás E., Abrisqueta I., García-Orellana Y.V., Tapia L.M., Vera J., Abrisqueta J.M., Ruiz-Sánchez M.C., 2008. Growth pattern and phonological stages of early-maturing peach trees under a Mediterranean climate. HortScience 43, 1813–1818.
Naor A., Hupert H., Greenblat Y., Peres M., Kaufman A., Klein I., 2001. The response of nectarine fruit size and midday stem water potential to irrigation level in stage III and crop load. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 126, 140–143.
Papanikolau X., Tsipouridis C., Thomidis T., Stylianidis D.C., 2005. Adaptation of twenty peach and nectarine varieties in Kos and their susceptibility to Plum pox virus and Phytophthora citrophthora. Hortic. Sci. 32, 112–117.
Seferoglu G., Tekintaş F.E., 2004. Adaptation of some nectarine cultivars in Aydin Region. Pak. J. Biol. Sci. 7, 114–117.
Szklarz M., Radajewska, B., 2009. The effect of mulch type and pruning on growth and yielding of nectarine (Prunus persica L.) cv ‘Fantasia’. Acta Sci. Pol., Hortorum Cultus 8, 45–52.
Valero C., Crisosto C.H., Slaughter D., 2007. Relationship between nondestructive firmness measurements and commercially important ripening fruit stages for peaches, nectarines and plums. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 44, 248–253.
Wu B.H., Quilot B., Génard M., Kervella J., Li S.H., 2005. Changes in sugar and organic acid concentrations during fruit maturation in peaches, P. davidiana and hybrids as analyzed by principal component analysis. Sci. Hortic. 103, 429–439.
Zec G., Čolić S., Janković Z., 2009. Pomological characteristics of late ripening nectarine cultivars. Voćarstvo 43, 31–35. (in Serbian)
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
