‘Gartella’ nektarin çeşidinde çiçek seyreltme uygulamalarının meyve tutumu, verim ve kalite özelliklerine etkileri

Öz

Bu çalışma, ‘Gartella’ nektarin çeşidinde çiçek seyrelticilerinin meyve tutumu, verim ve meyve kalite özellikleri üzerine etkilerini belirlemek amacıyla Tarsus/Mersin ekolojisinde sürdürülmüştür. Çalışmada, kontrol, elle çiçek seyreltmesi (EÇS), elle meyve seyreltmesi (EMS), %2, %3 ve %4 amonyum tiyosülfat (ATS) ve %3, %4 ve %5 kireç sülfür (KS) uygulamaları gerçekleştirilmiştir. KS, ATS ve EÇS uygulamaları %80 çiçeklenmede ve EMS uygulaması tam çiçeklenmeden 30 gün sonra uygulanmıştır. Bu uygulamaların meyve tutum oranları, verim bileşenleri ve meyve kalite özelliklerine etkileri incelenmiştir. Çalışmada, Tarsus/Mersin ekolojisinde ‘Gartella’ çeşidinde çiçeklenmenin 10-18 Şubat tarihleri arasında gerçekleşmiştir. En düşük meyve tutma oranı EÇS (%22.52) ve EMS (%28.78) uygulamalarında tespit edilmiştir. ‘Gartella’ çeşidinde en yüksek dekara verim %2 KS uygulamasında (4.96 ton) belirlenmiştir. En yüksek meyve ağırlığı EMS uygulamasından (99.81 g) elde edilmiştir. Ayrıca, meyve verim ve kalite özellikleri bakımından EMS uygulamasına en yakın değerlere EÇS uygulaması sahip olmuştur. Bununla birlikte, %4 ATS uygulamasından verim ve meyve kalite özellikleri bakımından ümitvar sonuçlar elde edilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, çiçek seyrelticisi olarak ATS ve KS uygulamaları için zaman ve doz uygulamaları konularında çalışmalara devam edilmesini önermekteyiz.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Amonyum tiyosülfat
• Kireç sülfür
• Meyve rengi
• Meyve iriliği
• Ürün Yükü

The effects of flower thinning treatments on fruit set, yield and quality properties in ‘Gartella’ nectarine cultivar

Abstract

This study was carried out to determine the effects of flower thinners on fruit set, yield, and fruit quality traits in the ‘Gartella’ nectarine cultivar in Tarsus/Mersin ecology. In the study, manual flower thinning (MFloT), manual fruit thinning (MFrT), and 3%, 4%, and 5% lime sulphur (LS) and 2%, 3%, and 4% ammonium thiosulfate (ATS) were used. LS, ATS, and MFloT were applied at 80% flowering and MFrT was applied 30 days after full flowering. The effects of these applications on fruit set rates, yield components, and fruit quality traits were investigated. In the study, flowering occurred between 10 and 18 February in the ‘Gartella’ grown in Tarsus/Mersin ecology. The lowest fruit set rate was determined from MFLoT (22.52%) and MFrT (28.78%) applications. The highest yield per decare in the ‘Gartella’ was determined from 2% KS application (4.96 tons). The highest fruit weight was obtained from MFrT application (99.81 g). In addition, MFloT application had the closest values to MFrt application regarding fruit yield and quality characteristics. However, positive results were obtained from 4% of ATS application regarding yield and fruit quality traits. As a result, we can recommend continuing studies on application time and dose for ATS and LS as flower thinners in peach-nectarines.

Keywords

• Ammonium thiosulfate
• Lime sulphur
• Fruit color
• Fruit size
• Croap load

Kaynakça

1. Alcobendas, R., Mirás-Avalos, J.M., Alarcón, J.J., Pedrero, F., & Nicolás, E. (2012). Combined effects of irrigation crop load and fruit position on size, color and firmness of fruits in an extra-early cultivar of peach. Scientia Horticulturae, 142, 128-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2012.05.003
2. Asteggiano, L., Giordani, G., Bevilacqua, A., Vittone, G., Pellegrino, S., & Costa, G. (2015). Bloom mechanical thinning improves fruit quality and reduces production costs in peach. Acta Horticulturae, 1084, 389-394. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2015.1084.55
3. Bayazıt, S., Çalışkan, O., & Kılıç, D. (2021). Akdeniz Bölgesi’nde örtüaltı meyve yetiştiriciliği. Bahçe, 50, 59-70.
4. Byers, R.E., Lyons, Jr. C.G. (1985). Peach flower thinning and possible sites of action of desiccating chemicals. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 110, 662-667. https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.110.5.662
5. Byers, R.E. (1999). Effect of bloom-thinning chemicals on peach fruit set. Journal of Tree Fruit Production, 2, 59-78. https://doi.org/10.1300/J072v02n02_06
6. Byers, R.E., Costa, G., & Vizzotto, G. (2003). Flower and fruit thinning of peach and other Prunus. J. Janick (Ed.) Horicultural Review (p. 351-392). https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470650851.ch7
7. Chang, Y., Sarkhosh, A., Brecht, J., & Andersen, P. (2018). Thinning Florida peaches for larger fruit. UF/IFAS Extension, pp.1-6.
8. Çalışkan, O., Bayazıt, S., Gündüz, K., Kılıç, D., & Göktaş, S. (2021). Earliness, yield, and fruit quality characteristics in low chill peach-nectarines: a comparison of protected and open area cultivation. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 45, 191-202. https://doi.org/10.3906/tar-2005-30

9. Çalışkan, O., Kılıç, D., & Bayazıt, S. (2024). Fruit yield and quality performance of low chilling nectarine cultivars under Mediterranean climate. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 26, 637-653. https://doi.org/10.22034/JAST.26.3.637
10. Çalışkan, O., & Bayazıt, S. (2024). Changes in winter chilling duration for stone fruıts under global warming: Impacts in the Mediterranean region of Türkiye. S Türker, H Gözel, H Çetinkaya and YK Haspolat (Eds.), Climate Change and Fruit farming (p.100-126), Ankara.
11. Ertürk, Ü. (1998). Bazı şeftali çeşitlerinde meyve seyreltme sıklığının çiçek tomurcuklarının gelişimi, verimlilik ve meyve kalitesi üzerine etkileri. MSc Tezi, Uludağ University, Institute of Sciences, Dept. of Horticulture, 130p., Bursa.
12. FAO. (2025, January 15). Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL
13. Jiménez, C.M., & Díaz, J.B.R. (2002). Fruit distribution and early thinning intensity influence fruit quality and productivity of peach and nectarine trees. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 127, 892-900. https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.127.6.892
14. Kader, A.A., & Mitchell, F.G. (1989). Peaches, Plums and Nectarines. JH LaRue and RS Johnson (Eds.), Postharvest Physiology. (p.158-164). University of California, California.
15. Kaşka, N. (2001). Sert çekirdekli meyvelerde üretim hedefleri üzerine öneriler. 1. Sert Çekirdekli Meyveler Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitabı, Yalova. 10-11 s.
16. Küden, A.B., Küden, A., Bayazit, S., Çömlekçioğlu, S., & İmrak, B. (2010). Şeftali yetiştiriciliği. Çağlar Ofset, 25s.
17. Küden, A.B., Çölekçioğlu, S., Sarıer, A., & Tanrıver, E. (2019). Şeftali ve nektarin yetiştiriciliği. AB Küden (Ed.). Sert Çekirdekli Meyve yetiştiriciliği (s. 60-89), Tarım Gündem Dergisi.
18. Lichou, J., Jay, M., & Gonsolin, L. (1997). Armothin (R): A new chemical agent efficient for peach blossom thinning. Acta Horticulturae, 451, 683-689. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1997.451.82
19. Mazzoni, L., Medori, I., Balducci, F., Marcellini, M., Acciarri, P., Mezzetti, B., & Capocasa, F. (2022). Branch numbers and crop load combination effects on production and fruit quality of flat peach cultivars (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch) trained as catalonian vase. Plants, 11, 308. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11030308
20. Myers, S.C., Savelle, A.T., Tustin, D.S., & Byers, R.E. (2002). Partial flower thinning ıncreases shoot growth, fruit size, and subsequent flower formation of peach. HortScience, 37, 647-650. https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.37.4.647
21. OECD (2010, April). Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). International Standards for Fruit and Vegetables: Peaches and Nectarines. Trade and Agriculture, pp.80, France.
22. Osborne, J.L., & Robinson, T. (2008). Chemical peach thinning: Understanding the relationship between crop load and crop value. New York Fruit Quarterly, 16, 19-23.
23. Özdemir Eroğlu, Z., Mısırlı, A., & Küden, A. (2016). The cross-breeding performances of some peach varieties. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi, 26, 89-97. https://doi.org/10.29133/yyutbd.236447
24. Rasouli, M., Khademi, O., & Asadi, W. (2020). The impact of new blossom thinners and hand-thinned on fruit quality and quantity in peach cv. Alberta and nectarine cv. Sun King. International Journal of Fruit Science, 20, 1238-1254. https://doi.org/10.1080/15538362.2020.1717404
25. Rencüzoğulları, E., Dikbaş, O., & Çalışkan, O. (2016). Örtüaltında yetiştirilen Flariba nektarin (Prunus persica var. nectarina Maxim) çeşidinin fenolojik ve meyve kalite özellikleri. Bahçe, 45, 1054-1058.
26. Robinson, T.L., & Dominguez, L.I. (2015). Effect of timing of caustic bloom thinning sprays during bloom on fruit set, yield and fruit size of peach. Acta Horticulturae, 1084, 471-477. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2015.1084.65
27. SAS Institute (2005). SAS Online Doc, Version 9.1.3. SAS Inst.,Cary, NC, USA.
28. Slingerland, K. (2006). Establishment and production costs for tender fruit in Ontario. M Jn (Ed.), Economic Report, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, K. Slingerland and Queen’s Printer for Ontario, Toronto.
29. Sutton, M., Doyle, J., Chavez, D., & Malladi, A. (2020). Optimizing fruit-thinning strategies in peach (Prunus persica) production. Horticulturae, 41, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae6030041
30. TSE (2007, Ocak). Türk Standartları Enstitüsü (TSE), TS42 Şeftali Tebliği. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2007/06/20070604-3.htm
31. TUİK (2025, Şubat). Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TÜİK). https://biruni.tuik.gov.tr/medas/?kn=92&locale=tr
32. Turk, A., Fait, N., & Stopar, M. (2014). Tergitol as a possible thinning agent for peach cv. Redhaven. Horticultural Science (Prague), 41, 49-54. https://doi.org/10.17221/22/2014-HORTSCI
33. Visai, C., Marro, M., & Poma Treccani, C. (1985). Orientation and light effects on fertility and production of peach fruiting wood. Acta Horticulturae, 173, 177-182. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.1985.173.20
34. Warner, G. (2009). Stone fruit thinning. Good Fruit Grower, 60, 18.
35. Westwood, M.N. (1995). Temperate Zone Pomology. Timber Pres, Oregon.
36. Yoon, T.M., Robinson, T.L., & Osborne, J.L. (2011). Blossom thinning of 'Redhaven' and 'Babygold 5' peaches with different chemicals. Acta Horticulturae, 903, 833-839. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2011.903.116