Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
ASPHC Baner

Vol. 18 No. 4 (2019)

Articles

Comparison of two planting systems for several pear cultivars

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24326/asphc.2019.4.12
Submitted: July 22, 2019
Published: 2019-08-07

Abstract

Choice of orchard system is one of the major factors, on which pear crop size and quality depend. The purpose of this research was to assess the influence of two training systems involving trees trained to different number of leaders on growth, yield, and fruit quality of three pear cultivars. The study was conducted in 2001–2012 near Wrocław (south-western Poland). One-year-old trees of ‘Carola’, ‘Dicolor’ and ‘Erika’ cultivars on the Quince S1 rootstock were planted in the spring 2001 using 3.5 m between rows and a variable in-row spacing: 1.7 m (Drilling form with 3 leaders) and 1.2 m (Güttingen – V system with 1 leader). More vigorous growth was observed from more sparsely planted trees under the Drilling form. The total per-tree yield during 2002–2012 was decreasing as the planting density increased. No differences were observed on yield per hectare between the tested systems. The Drilling trees produced significantly heavier and larger fruit than the trees trained to the V-Güttingen system.

References

  1. Barritt, B.H., Konishi, B., Dilley, M. (2008). Performance of four high density apple orchard systems with ‘Fuji’ and ‘Braeburn’. Acta Hortic., 772, 389–394.
  2. Bianco, R.L., Policarpo, M., Scariano, L., Marco, L.D. (2007). Vegetative and reproductive behaviour of ‘Conference’ and ‘Williams’ pear trees trained to V-shape system. Acta Hortic., 732, 457–462.
  3. Blažek, J., Vondráček, J., Vávra, R. (2003). Yields and tree vigour of pear cultivars bred in the RBIP at Holovousy. Vĕd. Práce Ovoc., 18, 39–51.
  4. Błaszczyk, J. (2005). Porównanie wzrostu i początkowego plonowania czterech odmian grusz. In: XXV Międz. Semin. Sad., 17–18 marca 2005, Limanowa, 71–72.
  5. Buler, Z., Mika, A. (2006). Growth, yield and fruit quality in ‘Sampion’ apple trees trained using four different training systems: Hytec, Solen, Mikado and Spindle. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res., 14, 117–124.
  6. Buler, Z., Mika, A., Krzewińska, D., Czynczyk, A., Bielicki, P., Michalska, B. (2008). Results of growing European and Asian pear trees at high planting density with manual fruit thinning. Zesz. Nauk. Inst. Sadow. Kwiac. Skiern., 16, 91–101.
  7. Choi, J.J., Choi, J.H., Han, J.H., Yim, S.H., Jung, S.K., Choi, H.S. (2017). Comparision of growth characteristics and productivity of young trees of a new cultivar ‘Manpungbae’ trained to trellis systems. Hortic. Sci. Tech., 35(4), 393–401.
  8. Choi, J.J., Gu, M., Choi, J.H., Han, J.H., Yim, S.H., Kim, Y.K., Jung, S.K., Choi, H.S. (2014). Growth and fruit production of Asian pear trees grown on Y-, T-, and Vase-training systems. Hort. Environ. Biotechnol., 55(1), 1–8.
  9. D’Abrosca, B., Scognamiglio, M., Corrado, L., Chiocchio, I., Zampella, L., Mastrobuoni, F., Rega, P., Scortichini, M., Fiorentino, A., Petriccione, M. (2017). Evaluation of different training systems on Annurca apple fruits revealed by agronomical, qualitative and NMR-based metabolomic approaches. Food Chem., 222, 18–27.
  10. Dadashpour, A., Shakouri, M.J., Shojaie, Z.F., Dodangeh, M.R. (2012). Evaluation of growth, yield and fruit characteristics of five apple cultivars on ‘Guttingen V’ system during 2006–2008. Indian J. Sci. Technol., 5(1), 1840–1843 .
  11. Dorigoni, A., Lezzer, P., Dallabetta, N., Serra, S., Musacchi S. (2011). Bi-axis: an alternative to slender spindle for apple orchards. Acta Hortic., 903, 581–588.
  12. Elkins, R.B., Klonsky, K., DeMoura, R., DeJong, T.M. (2008). Economic evaluation of high density versus standard orchard configurations; case study using performance data for ‘Golden Russet Bosc’ pears. Acta Hortic., 800, 739–746.
  13. Gandev, S., Dzhuvinov, V. (2014). Training and pruning of apple and modern trends of development – an overview. Turk. J. Agric. Nat. Sci., special issue 1, 1264–1267.
  14. Hampson, C.R., Quamme, H.A., Brownlee, R.T. (2002). Canopy growth, yield and fruit quality of ‘Royal Gala’ apple trees grown for eight years in five tree training systems. HortScience, 37(4), 627–631.
  15. Hassan, H.S.A., Sarrwy, S.M.A., Mostafa, E.A.M., Dorria, M.A. (2010). Influence of training systems on leaf mineral contents, growth, yield and fruit quality of ‘Anna’ apple trees. Res. J. Agric. Biol. Sci., 6(4), 443–448.
  16. Inomata, Y., Kudo, K., Wada, M., Masuda, T., Bessho, H., Suzuki, K. (2004). The influence of the training system on characteristics of tree growth, fruit productivity and dry matter production of columnar-type apple tree ‘Maypole’. Hortic. Res. (Japan), 3(4), 387–392.
  17. Jajo, A., Rahim, Md.A., Serra, S., Gagliardi, F., Jajo, N.K., Musacchi, S., Costa, G., Bonghi, C., Trainotti, L. (2014). Impact of tree training system, branch type and position in the canopy on the ripening homogeneity of ‘Abbé Fétel’ pear fruit. Tree Genet. Genomes, 10(5), 1477–1488.
  18. Kappel, F., Brownlee, R. (2001). Early performance of ‘Conference’ pear on four training systems. HortScience, 36(1), 69–71.
  19. Kwon, Y.H., Park, Y.S., Park, J.E. (2011). Changes of fruit characteristics by fruit load control in ‘Niitaka’ and ‘Whangkeumbae’ pear trees on Y-trellis training system. Korean J. Hort. Sci. Technol., 29(6), 523–530.
  20. Lauri, P.E. (2009). Developing a new paradigm for apple training. Compact Fruit Tree, 42(2), 17–19.
  21. Lewko J., Modrak P. (2009). Orchard performance of young ‘Erika’ pear trees depending on rootstock and root pruning. Zesz. Probl. Postęp. Nauk Roln., 536, 137–142.
  22. Lordan, J., Alegre, S., Montserrat, R., Asin, L. (2017). Yield and profitability of ‘Conference’ pear in five training systems in North East of Spain. Spanish J. Agric. Res., 15(3), e0904 – 9 pages.
  23. Lordan, J., Francescatto, P., Dominquez, L., Robinson, T.L. (2018). Long-term effects of tree density and tree shape on apple orchard performance, a 20 year study – Part 1, agronomic analysis. Sci. Hortic., 238, 303–317.
  24. Maas, F., Steeg, P., van der (2001). V-hedge with four branches provides the best tree shape at Randwijk. Fruitteelt (Den Haag), 91(39), 12–14.
  25. Monney, P., Evéquoz, N. (1999). A study of new orchard systems for apple trees. Rev. Suisse Vitic. d’Arboric. d’Hortic., 31(3), 153–158.
  26. Ozkan, Y., Yildiz, K., Kucuker, E., Cekic, C., Ozgen, M., Akca, Y. (2016). Performance of ‘Fuji’ apple on M.9 rootstock in different tree training systems for the first five years. J. Agr. Sci. Tech., 18, 1647–1653.
  27. Paprštein, F., Matĕjiček, A., Blažek, J., Kloutvor, J., Bouma, J. (2007). Evaluation of winter pear cultivars. Nové Odrůdy Ovoce, 33–41.
  28. Pereira, A.J., Pasa, M.S. (2016). Yield performance of ‘Royal Gala’ and ‘Fuji’ apple trees subjected to different planting densities and rootstocks. Pesq. Agropec. Bras., 51(4), 348–356.
  29. Platon, I.V. (2007). Preliminary results on planting system and density in apple. Acta Hortic., 732, 471–474.
  30. Porębski, S., Rzeźnicka, B., Banach, P. (2008). Influence of the type of tree crown on the growth and fruiting of ‘Florina’ apple trees. Zesz. Nauk. Inst. Sadow. Kwiac. Skiern., 16, 13–19.
  31. Rabcewicz, J., Mika, A., Buler, Z., Białkowski, P. (2017). Preliminary valuation of ”Y” and ”V”-trellised canopies for mechanical harvesting of plums, sweet cherries and sour cherries for the fresh market. J. Hortic. Res., 25(2), 27–35.
  32. Robinson, T.L. (2000). V-shaped apple planting systems. Acta Hortic., 513, 337–347.
  33. Robinson, T.L., Dominguez, L. (2015). Yield and profitability of high-density pear production with Pyrus rootstocks. Acta Hortic., 1094, 247–256.
  34. Rutkowski, K., Kantorowicz-Bąk, M., Pacholak, E. (2009). Effect of different tree training systems on growth and yielding of two apple cultivars. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res., 17(1), 49–59.
  35. Sosna, I. (2006). Wpływ systemu uprawy na wzrost i owocowanie trzech odmian gruszy rosnących na dwóch klonach pigwy. Zesz. Nauk. Inst. Sadow. Kwiac. Skiern., 14, 5–13.
  36. Sosna, I. (2017). V-shaped canopies in an apple orchard from the perspective of over a dozen years of research. J. Agr. Sci. Tech., 19, 415–424.
  37. Sosna, I., Czaplicka, M. (2008). The influence of two training systems on growth and cropping of three pear cultivars. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res., 16, 75–81.
  38. Sosna, I., Czaplicka-Pędzich, M. (2013). Growth and fruiting of trees of six pear cultivars depending on applied rootstock. Episteme, 19(3), 441–451.
  39. Uselis, N., Lanauskas, J., Kviklys, D. (2007). Productivity and fruit quality of apple tree cv. ‘Alva’ under different orchard constructions. Sodininkyste ir Daržininkyste, 26(4), 30–36.
  40. Vercammen, J. (2014). Comparison of different planting systems for ‘Conference’. Acta Hortic., 1058, 37–44.
  41. Widmer, A. (2005). The development of Güttingen-V-, Mikado and Drilling growing systems: an overview. Obst- und Weinbau, 141(7), 14–16.
  42. Yoshida, A., Ikeda, T., Murata, K., Inoue, K. (2006). Effects of various training systems on fruit production efficiency in young filler trees of Japanese pear (Pyrus pyrifolia) ‘Gold Nijisseiki’. Hortic. Res. (Japan), 1, 63–68.
  43. Zygmuntowska, K., Jadczuk-Tobjasz, E. (2008). Wpływ zróżnicowanego nawożenia potasem na wzrost i owocowanie pięciu odmian gruszy. Zesz. Nauk. Inst. Sadow. Kwiac. Skiern., 16, 83–89.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Similar Articles

<< < 108 109 110 111 112 113 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.