Evaluation of Multipass Mechanical Harvesting on ‘Skeena’ Sweet Cherries Trained to Y-trellis

Abstract

<jats:p>A study on multipass harvesting using a mechanical harvesting prototype was proposed for mechanical harvesting of fresh market sweet cherries. Fruit damage rate, fruit removal rate, and fruit maturity level were three of the measures used to compare the performance of the multipass harvesting method against single-pass harvesting. The multipass harvesting was conducted in four consecutive days with short duration of 2.5 seconds at each day, while the single-pass harvesting was one-time harvesting with long duration of 10 seconds at a single day. To generate baseline information for comparison, single-pass harvestings were performed on the first and the last days of the multipass harvesting. Fruit maturity level was determined by comparing the fruit skin color against a standard color chart with seven color levels. Field test results showed that the percentage of under-mature fruit (maturity levels ≤ 5) was substantially lower with multipass harvesting than that with day 1 single-pass harvesting. Similarly, the percentage of over-mature fruit (maturity level 7) was noticeably lower with multipass harvesting than that with day 4 single-pass harvesting. Multipass harvesting achieved a fruit removal rate of 83.4% ± 10.3% and a harvest-induced fruit damage rate of 5.0% ± 4.4%. The corresponding fruit removal rates from single-pass harvesting tests were 48.0% ± 16.1% on day 1 and 66.7% ± 16.2% day 4. Harvest-induced fruit damage rates with single-pass harvesting were 20.1% ± 9.9% on day 1 and 11.8% ± 6.0% on day 4. The results supported the hypothesis that multipass of short-duration shaking offer a potential to achieve a higher overall harvesting efficiency with better fruit quality, and therefore could lead to an optimal solution for mechanical harvesting of fresh market sweet cherries. It is noted that comprehensive economic analysis will be necessary to establish commercial viability of the system in comparison with single-pass solutions.</jats:p>

Comparison of the yielding of plum, sour cherry, and sweet cherry trees trained to a trellis for mechanical harvesting of fruit with those trained to a leader

“…Pol. Hortorum Cultus, online first, https://doi.org/10.24326/ asphc.2023.4638 yield confirm the previous research of many authors [Ampatzidis et al 2012, Day et al 2013, Larbi and Karkee 2014, He et al 2015, Mika et al 2016]. In the fourth year after planting the trees (2017), fruit yields were low due to a cool spring and frosts in April.…”

“…Nowadays, several species of fruit shrubs and trees, such as olive, sour cherry, plum and other species, are harvested mechanically [Brown et al 1983, Wawrzyńczak et al 1998, Jiménez et al 2011, Mika et al 2012, Rabcewicz et al 2017. Experimental work has been underway to improve the technology of stone fruit harvesting [Ampatzidis et al 2012, Larbi and Karkee 2014, He et al 2015]. In the beginning, the mechanical harvesting of the stone fruits was carried out with the use of sha-king devices that gripped the tree trunk.…”

Analysis of shaking-induced cherry fruit motion and damage

“…Similarly we can see that the damage percentages were lower in the first three 5-cycle intervals than the last three at 10 and 18 vibration frequency. Therefore, it might be important to reduce the continuous vibration time to achieve low fruit damage percentage, which agrees with findings in the research of utilizing intermittent harvesting technology to reduce overall fruit damage (He, Zhou, Zhang, Karkee, 2015).…”

The Orchard Architecture Dedicated for Mechanical Harvesting of Dessert Plums and Prunes

“…In a trials by Amphatzidis et al (2012), Larbi andKarkee (2014), andHe et al (2015), sweet cherry trees were trained with a limited number of branches. There were only 3 or 4 main limbs on the side to act on, so as to limit fruit damage when falling down.…”

“…Several fruit tree species such as cherries, olives, plums, and fruit bushes are mechanically harvested (Jiménez et al 2011;Mika et al 2012;Rabcewicz et al 2017). Experimental work is still being conducted to improve the harvesting technology (Amphatzidis et al 2012;Larbi & Karkee 2014;He et al 2015). Mechanical fruit harvesting by means of trunk shakers is mostly performed, but it has several disadvantages, particularly fruit bruising and low effectiveness of fruit collection (Castro-Garcia et al 2012).…”