The Assessment of Different Rootstocks to the Pear Tree Cultivar 'Carrick'

Giacobbo, Clévison Luiz; Neto, Alexandre Gazolla; Pazzin, Dalcionei; Francescatto, Poliana; Fachinello, José Carlos

doi:10.17660/actahortic.2010.872.49

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Wertheim [19] reported that MC and BA 29 rootstocks showed higher yield efficiency than OH (Old Home) 11, OH 20, OH 33 and OHF (Old Home x Farmingdale) 333 rootstocks. As regards to yield efficiency the encountered data agree with Loreti et al [12] and Giacobbo et al [20] who analyzed different pear rootstocks and verified that the high yield efficiency is not always directly related to high production, once the rootstocks that increased production did not improve yield efficiency. These results are in general agreement with the findings of the researchers mentioned above.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Influence of rootstocks on growth, yield, fruit quality and leaf mineral element contents of pear cv. ‘Santa Maria’ in semi-arid conditions

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRootstocks play an essential role to determining orchard performance of fruit trees. Pyrus communis and Cydonia oblonga are widely used rootstocks for European pear cultivars. The lack of rootstocks adapted to different soil conditions and different grafted cultivars is widely acknowledged in pear culture. Cydonia rootstocks (clonal) and Pyrus rootstocks (seedling or clonal) have their advantages and disadvantages. In each case, site-specific environmental characteristics, specific cultivar response and production objectives must be considered before choosing the best rootstock. In this study, the influence of three Quince (BA 29, Quince A = MA, Quince C = MC) and a local European pear seedling rootstocks on the scion yield, some fruit quality characteristics and leaf macro (N, P, K, Ca and Mg) and micro element (Fe, Zn, Cu, Mn and B) content of ‘Santa Maria’ pear (Pyrus communis L.) were investigated.ResultsTrees on seedling rootstock had the highest annual yield, highest cumulative yield (kg tree−1), largest trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA), lowest yield efficiency and lowest cumulative yield (ton ha−1) in the 10th year after planting. The rootstocks had no significant effect on average fruit weight and fruit volume. Significantly higher fruit firmness was obtained on BA 29 and Quince A. The effect of rootstocks on the mineral element accumulation (N, K, Ca, Mg, Fe, Zn, Cu, Mn and B) was significant. Leaf analysis showed that rootstocks used had different mineral uptake efficiencies throughout the early season.ConclusionThe results showed that the rootstocks strongly affected fruit yield, fruit quality and leaf mineral element uptake of ‘Santa Maria’ pear cultivar. Pear seedling and BA 29 rootstock found to be more prominent in terms of several characteristics for ‘Santa Maria’ pear cultivar that is grown in highly calcareous soil in semi-arid climate conditions. We determined the highest N, P (although insignificant), K, Ca, Mg, Fe and Cu mineral element concentrations on the pear seedling and BA 29 rootstocks. According to the results, we recommend the seedling rootstock for normal density plantings (400 trees ha−1) and BA 29 rootstock for high-density plantings (800 trees ha−1) for ‘Santa Maria’ pear cultivar in semi-arid conditions.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

Influence of rootstocks on growth, yield, fruit quality and leaf mineral element contents of pear cv. ‘Santa Maria’ in semi-arid conditions

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is backed up with Faust, 12 who associates the difference of leaf area development with plant development, as height, canopy volume and trunk diameter. Similar results were checked by Giacobbo et al, 4 which found that the rootstock that led to less vigorous plant also presented lower leaf areas. There were no significant differences of fresh and dry leaves weight of 'Seleta' raised on the different rootstocks ( Table 3).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 87%

“…In this context, research work related to adaptation and behavior of pear cultivars and rootstocks has been accomplished, Giacobbo et al, 4 in a study with the cultivar Carrick found that rootstocks with larger diameter of the trunk, provide the plants, the greater weight of pruning and productive efficiency and cv. Carrick reduced in height in 44.62% when grafted on quince 'DuLot' in relation to the quince 'EMC', considered dwarf.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rootstocks as possible alternative uses for pear trees cultivar select

Giacobbo¹,

Fischer²,

Uberti³

2018

HIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Giacobbo et al (2008) reported that the pruning weight of the 'Packham's Triumph' pear cultivar grafted on quince and pear rootstocks was higher on strong rootstocks than on weak rootstocks, and they emphasized that the highest pruning weight was in Smyrna and Alongado rootstocks and the lowest in Portugal rootstock. Giacobbo et al (2010) reported that the effect of rootstocks on the pruning weight of 'Carrick' pear cultivar, which they grafted on 13 different quinces and one pear rootstock, was significant. Clingeleffer et al (2019) reported that the rootstock x cultivar interaction significantly affected pruning weight.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Different Rootstocks and Cultivars on Pruning Weight in Young Pear Trees

KUL

Öztürk

Faizi

2022

Black Sea Journal of Agriculture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was carried out to evaluation of the effects on pruning weight (kg plant-1), cumulative pruning weight per plant (kg plant-1), and cumulative pruning weight per hectare (kg ha-1) of 3 quince rootstocks (BA29, Quince A, Quince MC) and 3 pear clonal rootstocks (Fox11, OHxF333, Farold 40) and pear seedling rootstocks grafted on 4 standard pear cultivars (‘Abate Fetel’, ‘Deveci’, ‘Santa Maria’, ‘Williams’) between 2019-2021 years. Rootstocks, cultivars, research years and their interactions significantly affected all examined parameters in the study, except for the interaction of year x rootstock x cultivar. Regarding rootstock averages, the highest pruning weight (kg plant-1) was observed from Fox 11, the lowest was in the BA29, QA, and MC quince rootstocks. Regardless of the cultivar averages, the highest pruning weight was in the 'Deveci’, the lowest was in the ‘Santa Maria’ pear cultivar. The highest pruning weight (kg plant-1) was observed from ‘Deveci'/Fox11, and the lowest was in the 'Williams'/QA, 'Williams'/BA29, 'Abate Fetel'/MC, and 'Santa Maria'/MC combinations in terms of rootstock x cultivar interaction. The highest cumulative pruning weight per plant (kg) was determined in the 'Deveci'/Fox11, the lowest was in the 'Williams'/QA combination in terms of rootstock x cultivar interaction. Furthermore, the highest cumulative pruning weight per hectare (kg) was determined in the 'Deveci’/Fox11, the lowest was in the ‘Williams’/QA, ‘Williams’/BA29, ‘Abate Fetel'/MC, 'Santa Maria'/MC, and 'Santa Maria'/Seedling combination in terms of rootstock x cultivar interaction. Except for the pear seedling rootstock, quince clone rootstocks generally had lower all pruning weight traits than pear clone rootstocks in the study. It can be said that the weaker development of quince rootstocks compared to pear rootstocks causes this situation. According to the results of this study carried out on young pear trees, it can be said that quince rootstocks are somewhat advantageous due to less pruning labor and cost

show abstract

The Assessment of Different Rootstocks to the Pear Tree Cultivar 'Carrick'

Cited by 7 publications

References 1 publication

Influence of rootstocks on growth, yield, fruit quality and leaf mineral element contents of pear cv. ‘Santa Maria’ in semi-arid conditions

Influence of rootstocks on growth, yield, fruit quality and leaf mineral element contents of pear cv. ‘Santa Maria’ in semi-arid conditions

Rootstocks as possible alternative uses for pear trees cultivar select

Evaluation of Different Rootstocks and Cultivars on Pruning Weight in Young Pear Trees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About