Apple Rootstock Studies: Thirty-Five Years’ Results With Lane’s Prince Albert on Clonal Rootstocks

Preston, A. P.

doi:10.1080/00221589.1958.11513911

Cited by 26 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is possible that inherently low vigor reduces growth and sink demand for vegetation, leaving more sources available for fruit set and reproductive growth. In fact, many studies show that reducing vigor, by dwarfing rootstock (Avery, 1970;Preston, 1958), controlled water stress or regulated deficit irrigation (Mitchell et al, 1989), root pruning (Geisler and Ferree, 1984) or containing root volume with drip irrigation (Mitchell and Chalmers, 1983), shoot removal and/or chemical control of vegetative growth (Mulas et al, 2011;Rugini and Pannelli, 1992;Williams et al, 1986), all result in enhanced yields.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth Is Inversely Correlated with Yield Efficiency across Cultivars in Young Olive (Olea europaea L.) Trees

Rosati¹,

Paoletti²,

Pannelli³

et al. 2017

horts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Additional index words. modeling, yield efficiency, partitioning, harvest indexAbstract. The modern olive industry is increasingly interested in olive cultivars that start producing early and remain relatively small, because they are suitable for super highdensity orchards. Some cultivars are better suited to this than others but it is not clear why. Understanding the mechanisms that lead to early production and reduced canopy size is therefore important. The object of this study was to investigate whether differences in vigor across olive cultivars are related to earliness and abundance of bearing. We analyzed tree growth and productivity in young coetaneous trees of 12 olive cultivars, grown together in the same orchard. Trunk diameter increased over the observation period, reaching significantly different values across cultivars. Canopy volume also increased, reaching 2-fold differences between the minimum and the maximum values. Cumulative yield increased, reaching up to 3-fold differences. When the cumulative yield at the end of the experiment was plotted against the final trunk diameter, no correlation was found. A significant correlation was found when cumulative yield was plotted against the increment in trunk diameter during the observation period for which yield data were collected. This relationship improved (i.e., R 2 rose from 0.57 to 0.83) when yield efficiency [i.e., cumulative yield per unit of final trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA) or per unit of canopy volume] was used instead of yield. These results clearly showed that trees that produced proportionally more (i.e., higher yield efficiencies) grew less. We conclude that, in young olive trees, vigor is inversely related to early bearing efficiency, which differs significantly across cultivars. The results support the hypothesis that early and abundant bearing is a major factor in explaining differences in vigor across olive cultivars.The olive industry requires canopy reduction to allow super high-density orchards which permit earlier production and continuous mechanical harvesting (Rallo et al., 2007;Tous et al., 1999). This has stimulated much research into reduced vigor or even dwarf cultivars

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Growth Is Inversely Correlated with Yield Efficiency across Cultivars in Young Olive (Olea europaea L.) Trees

Rosati¹,

Paoletti²,

Pannelli³

et al. 2017

horts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The water relations of apple trees and the effects of water deficits have been extensively studied and were recently reviewed by Landsberg and Jones (1981). There have also been many studies comparing the effects of apple rootstocks on growth and fruiting of scion varieties (Avery 1970, Economides 1976, Ferree 1976, Parry 1977, Preston 1958, Rogers and Beakbane 1957, Sampson and Johnstone 1974, Tubbs 1973a. A number of mechanisms have been proposed by which apple rootstocks could influence the size of the tree, but there is still much debate in this area.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of rootstock on apple (Malus domestica) tree water relations

Olien

Lakso²

1986

Physiologia Plantarum

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of rootstock on mid‐season water relations, under orchard conditions of non‐limiting soil moisture, were determined for bearing ‘Empire’ apple trees (Malus domestica Borkh.) on the clonal rootstocks M9, M26, M7, MM106, and MM104 (most to least dwarfing) in their sixth and seventh growing seasons. Stem water potentials (ψstem) of trees on M9 and M26 were more negative at midday, under warm, sunny conditions, than were the trees on the other three rootstocks. However, change in ψstem per change in stem distance through the canopy (water potential gradient) did not vary among rootstocks at midday. There was no rootstock effect on diurnal variation in transpiration or stomatal conductance. Differences in water storage capacitance, relative to tree size, were determined in a separate study but did not account for the differences observed in ψstem. Calculated hydraulic conductivities of xylem water transport suggest that rootstocks differ in their ability to conduct water to the scion, but hydraulic conductivity of the scion was not affected by rootstock. Root‐stock differences in hydraulic conductivity were not accounted for by differences in tree size.

show abstract

“…MaIling XVI has been classified by Hatton (1919) as a vigorous rootstock, and Preston (1958) has confirmed this classification. The extremely poor results obtained with MaIling XVI rootstocks in this trial at Oratia and in a previous experiment on similar heavy clay soil at Mt Albert (Woodhead et al 1954) could probably be attributed, in part, to "wet conditions."…”

Section: The Malling XVI Problemmentioning

confidence: 51%

“…This was confirmed by a study of foliage, flower, and fruit characteristics from 6-year-old unworked rootstocks of N /1/19 and Mailing III rootstocks at the Havelock North research orchard. The growth and cropping of trees on N /1/19 rootstocks in this trial approximates to the relative status of MaIling III in rootstock trials at the East Mailing research station as described by Preston (1958). It must be assumed that, since the N /1 / 19 clone was obtained from root cuttings taken from a large old tree in Otago (Allan and Woodhead 1933), the rootstock must have been introduced into New Zealand many years ago, well before the time when Hatton collected and classified the Mailing series of rootstocks.…”

Section: Re-identification Of N /1/19mentioning

confidence: 99%