A New Approach for Analyzing and Interpreting Data on Fruit Drop in Mango

Abstract

<jats:p>Mango yields are frequently reduced by premature fruit drop, induced by plant stresses during the fruit set period in response to unsuitable climatic or crop management conditions. There are varying strategies for assessing premature fruit drop, which render the comparison and interpretation of published data difficult to draw general conclusions. Therefore, the objective was to provide a mathematical model that is generally valid for describing fruit losses of mango. The model was tested and validated by monitoring the fruit drop for the two local North Vietnamese cultivars, Hôi and Tròn, in different management systems over six consecutive growing seasons: 1) mango–maize intercropping and mango monocropping; 2) irrigation; and 3) plant growth regulator applications with 10 ppm N-(2-chloro-4-pyridyl)-N′-phenylurea (CPPU), 40 ppm 1-naphthaleneacetic acid (NAA), and 40 ppm gibberellins (GA<jats:sub>3</jats:sub> and GA<jats:sub>4+7</jats:sub>). The timely pattern of fruit drop was best described with a sigmoid function (<jats:italic>r</jats:italic><jats:sup>2</jats:sup> = 0.85) and formed the basis for defining three distinct drop stages. The post-bloom drop, from full bloom to the maximum daily rate of fruit drop [FD(x)], had the highest fruit losses. The following midseason drop stage ends at 1% FD(x), a threshold that is suggested after a comprehensive literature review. Thereafter, during the preharvest drop stage, treatment and cultivar differences appear to remain constant despite continued fruit drop. In contrast to other mango intercropping studies, fruit loss was not greater in the mango–maize intercropping than in the mango monocropping. Irrigation resulted in approximately three times higher fruit retention compared with the non-irrigated control. A single application of NAA at marble fruit stage (BBCH-scale 701) resulted consistently in the highest fruit retention for both cultivars in midseason and at harvest. The model permits the separation between the drop stages, thus allowing the evaluation of 1) natural variation before treatment effects during post-bloom drop; 2) treatment efficacies during midseason drop; and 3) yield forecasting at the beginning of the preharvest stage.</jats:p>

Ethephon induced abscission in mango: physiological fruitlet responses

“…The mango ( Mangifera indica L.) trees of the local cultivar “Hôi” were between 10 and 15 years of age. For details on orchard management and phenology see Hagemann et al ( 2014 ).…”

“…Of particular concern in many mango production systems worldwide is the extensive fruitlet drop. This major production constraint has been extensively studied at the orchard level (Singh et al, 2005 ) and was also a key research objective by Hagemann et al ( 2014 ) who investigated the potential use of plant growth regulators, irrigation techniques, and cropping systems for improving fruit retention in mango. Both, biotic and abiotic factors have been frequently suggested as the key triggers for inducing fruitlet drop in mango (Singh et al, 2005 ).…”

“…Biotic factors are mainly the lack of pollination or fertilization of flowers and pest or disease pressure that subsequently lead to seed degeneration (Singh and Arora, 1965 ). Abiotic factors associated with fruitlet drop are extensive drought periods, extreme ambient air temperatures or dry and strong winds (Burondkar et al, 2000 ; Singh et al, 2005 ; Hagemann et al, 2014 , 2015 ). In plants these factors generally reduce the auxin efflux from as well as the carbohydrate influx to the fruitlet, thus the demand of the growing fruitlet is not sufficiently matched by its supply (Wünsche and Ferguson, 2005 ; Estornell et al, 2013 ).…”

Retraso De Floración Y Calidad Del Fruto De Mango Kent en El Sur De Sinaloa, México

“…En 2019 el testigo registró 0.5, diferente (P ≤ 0.05) de los valores de 0.1 en poda química y 0.2 en poda manual (Cuadro 3). Hagemann et al (2014) señalaron una caída alta de frutos de mango durante su crecimiento y desarrollo, con retención final entre 0.1 y 0.8 frutos/panícula. La menor retención de frutos en los árboles podados puede estar relacionado con el incremento de temperatura (Figura 1) posterior a la antesis.…”

Expression and interaction of the mango ethylene receptor MiETR1 and different receptor versions of MiERS1

“…Mango (Mangifera indica L.) trees of the cultivar 'Hôi' (n = 6) grown in a commercial orchard located in Yên Châu district, Vietnam were used as a source for plant material [37]. Samples (n ≥ 3) of various tissues were collected for expression analysis based on the phenological growth stages according to the BBCH scale [38]: (1) premature leaves and (2) their peduncles (BBCH = 115) as well as (3) old leaves and (4) their peduncles (BBCH = 119); (5) premature flowers (BBCH = 517) as well as mature flowers and floral parts (BBCH = 615) including (6) male flowers and (7) their stamen (separately collected), (8) perfect (hermaphrodite) flowers; fruitlets of (9) pinhead (∼6 mm, BBCH = 619), (10) pea (∼11 mm, BBCH = not applicable), or (11) marble size (∼20 mm, BBCH = 710); and the corresponding (12) pedicels of pea sized and (13) marble sized fruitlets.…”