Some factors influencing fruit set in ‘Sundrop’ apricot

McLaren, G.F.; Fraser, J. A.; Grant, J. E.

doi:10.1080/01140671.1996.9513935

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These cultivars produce a lower yield if appropriate pollinator schemes were not planted (McLaren et al 1996) Apricot flowering takes place in early spring and often proceeds in unfavourable weather conditions, such as low temperatures, rainfall, and wind. Such conditions limit bee flight and cross-pollination.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing of self-(in)compatibility in apricot cultivars from European breeding programmes

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-(in)compatibility was tested in 40 new apricot cultivars from European breeding programmes. Pollen-tube growth in pistils from laboratory pollinations was analysed using the fluorescence microscopy. Cultivars were considered self-compatible if at least one pollen tube reached the ovary in the majority of pistils. Cultivars were considered selfincompatible if the growth of pollen tubes in the style stopped along with formation of characteristic swellings. Of the examined cultivars, 18 were self-compatible and 22 were self-incompatible. Fluorescence microscopy provides a relatively rapid and reliable method to determine self-incompatibility in apricot cultivars.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing of self-(in)compatibility in apricot cultivars from European breeding programmes

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Differences in percentage set between years would be influenced by a number of factors which will be discussed elsewhere (McLaren et al 1996). However, even in years with good pollination conditions, 'Sundrop', 'CluthaGold', and ' Valleygold' set no more than 30% of their flowers whereas 'Moorpark' set up to 60% (Fig.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Pollination compatibility of ‘Sundrop’ apricot and its progeny in the ‘Clutha’ series

McLaren

Fraser

1996

New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flowers of the apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.) cultivar, 'Sundrop' produced low fruitset when self-pollinated or caged to exclude bees during bloom. The level of fruit set improved when 'Sundrop' flowers were pollinated with another cultivar, even when the pollen came from trees of its own progeny (the 'Clutha' series). Levels of self-compatibility varied within the 'Clutha' series; seven selections were as self-compatible as one of their parents 'Moorpark' whereas six showed low self-compatibility, similar to that of their other parent, 'Sundrop'. Comparison of the flowering dates of these and other commercial cultivars which could be used as pollenisers showed that in four of the five years 'CluthaGold', 'CluthaStar', 'CluthaSun', and 'CluthaGem' all flowered with 'Sundrop'. However, one year demonstrated the need to include an earlier flowering polleniser for 'Sundrop'. Five of the six named 'Clutha' selections were compatible with 'Sundrop'; only lack of synchrony of flowering will affect their value as potential pollenisers for this cultivar. Three of the more commonly planted newer cultivars had low self-compatibility-'Sundrop', 'CluthaGold', and 'Valleygold'-thus revising the pollination status of apricot from a crop that does not require crosspollination to one which generally does; care will be necessary in the planning of new plantings.

show abstract

“…This is complicated by a compatibility issue, with each cultivar pair having a specific fruit set percentage. As an example of this variability, pairs of cultivars in apricots have fruit set between 0.4% and 54% [55] . As with the estimation of the insect dependence coefficient, a truly accurate regional figure can only be determined by investigating all cultivar pairs grown in the region.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Insect Pollination Services with Cost of Replacement

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Value estimates of ecosystem goods and services are useful to justify the allocation of resources towards conservation, but inconclusive estimates risk unsustainable resource allocations. Here we present replacement costs as a more accurate value estimate of insect pollination as an ecosystem service, although this method could also be applied to other services. The importance of insect pollination to agriculture is unequivocal. However, whether this service is largely provided by wild pollinators (genuine ecosystem service) or managed pollinators (commercial service), and which of these requires immediate action amidst reports of pollinator decline, remains contested. If crop pollination is used to argue for biodiversity conservation, clear distinction should be made between values of managed- and wild pollination services. Current methods either under-estimate or over-estimate the pollination service value, and make use of criticised general insect and managed pollinator dependence factors. We apply the theoretical concept of ascribing a value to a service by calculating the cost to replace it, as a novel way of valuing wild and managed pollination services. Adjusted insect and managed pollinator dependence factors were used to estimate the cost of replacing insect- and managed pollination services for the Western Cape deciduous fruit industry of South Africa. Using pollen dusting and hand pollination as suitable replacements, we value pollination services significantly higher than current market prices for commercial pollination, although lower than traditional proportional estimates. The complexity associated with inclusive value estimation of pollination services required several defendable assumptions, but made estimates more inclusive than previous attempts. Consequently this study provides the basis for continued improvement in context specific pollination service value estimates.

show abstract

Some factors influencing fruit set in ‘Sundrop’ apricot

Cited by 8 publications

References 10 publications

Testing of self-(in)compatibility in apricot cultivars from European breeding programmes

Testing of self-(in)compatibility in apricot cultivars from European breeding programmes

Pollination compatibility of ‘Sundrop’ apricot and its progeny in the ‘Clutha’ series

Valuing Insect Pollination Services with Cost of Replacement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About