The Rootstock Influences Growth and Development Of ‘Deveci’ Pear

Year 2014, Volume: 1 Issue: Özel Sayı-1, 1049 - 1053, 01.03.2014

Ahmet Ozturk Burhan Ozturk

Abstract

The vegetative and reproductive performance of the ‘Deveci’ pear (Pyrus communis L.) grown on three rootstocks [Quince BA 29, EMC (Cydonia oblonga) and a seedling of P. communis] were compared between 2012 and 2013. Vegetative growth characteristics such as the rootstock and trunk diameter, leaf lamina width, leaf lamina length, leaf area, leaf petiole length and thickness, plant height and canopy volume were examined. Phenological characteristics such as the time of first flowering, full flowering, days from full flowering to maturity, harvest date and fruit weight and yield were also investigated. Phenological characteristics were seen in the EMC earlier than in the BA 29 or in the seedling. The most vigorous trees were on the BA 29 followed by the EMC and the seedling. The highest leaf lamina width, length, area and leaf petiole length were obtained from trees on the BA 29 rootstock followed by the EMC and seedling. EMC had a lower leaf petiole thickness than the others. The trees grafted on the BA 29 rootstock had a higher rootstock diameter, trunk diameter, plant height, and plant width and canopy volume than the others. The highest fruit weight and yield per tree were obtained from the trees on the BA 29 (405.7 g and 8.33 kg, respectively) and the EMC (157.6 g and 2.37 kg, respectively) followed by the seedling (62.6 g and 0.69 kg, respectively). As a result of this growing period, we suggest that the ‘Deveci’ pear should be grown on the BA 29 quince rootstock because of the more vigorous growth and the higher yield

Keywords

Pear, ‘Deveci’, growth, rootstock, yield, fruit weight

The Rootstock Influences Growth and Development Of ‘Deveci’ Pear

Abstract

Keywords

-

References

• Akçay, M.E., Büyükyılmaz, M., Burak, M., 2009. Marmara Bölgesi için ümitvar armut çeşitleri- IV. Bahçe 38(1):1-10
• Anonymous, 2014. Climate: Samsun - Climate graph, Temperature graph, Climate table". Climate- Data.org.
• Browning, G., Watkins, R., 1991. Preliminary evaluation of new quince (Cydonia oblonga Miller) hybrid rootstocks for pears. Journal Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 66:35–42.
• Buyukyilmaz, M., Bulagay, A.N., 1983. Promising pear cultivars for the Marmara Region-II. Bahce 12(2):5-14.
• Ercisli, S., 2004. A short review of the fruit germplasm resources of Turkey. Genetic Resource Crop Evol 51: 419-435.
• Erdem, H., Öztürk, B., 2012. Yapraktan uygulanan çinko'nun BA-29 anacı üzerine aşılı armut çeşitlerinin verimi, mineral element içeriği ve biyokimyasal özellikleri üzerine etkisi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Dergisi 7(1):93-106
• Erturk, Y., Guleryuz, M., Erdogan, U.G., 2009. Investigation on yield and growth of some pear cultivars on Quince A in Ispır (Upper Coruh Basin) ecological conditions. Bahce 38(1): 11-17 FAO, 2014. http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.as px?PageID=567#ancor (28 August 2014)
• Francescatto, P., Pazzin, D., Neto, A.G., Fachinello, J.C., Giacobbo, C.L., 2010. Evaluation of graft compatibility between quince rootstocks and pear scions. Acta Horticulturae 872:253-259
• Giacobbo, C.L., Neto, A.G., Pazzin, D., Francescatto, P., Fachinello, J.C., 2010. The assessment of different rootstocks to the pear tree cultivar ‘Carrick’. Acta Horticulturae 872:353-358
• Hudina, M., Orazem, P., Jakopic, J., Stampar, F., 2014. The phenolic content and its involvement in the graft incompatibility process of various pear rootstocks (Pyrus communis L.). Journal of Plant Physiology 171: 76-84.
• Jackson, J.E., 2003. Biology of apples and pears. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 488 pp.
• Kappel, F., Quamme, H. A. 1988. Growth and yield of pear cultivars on several rootstocks. Canadian Journal of Plant Science 68:1177-1183.
• Kırpjanovski, M., Ristevski, B., 2009. Biological and pomological characteristics of some pear varieties in Republic of Macedonia. Agric Cons Sci 74(2):123-126.
• Osmanoğlu, A., Şimşek, M., Şanlı, A., 2013. Bazı standart armut çeşitlerinin Bingöl ekolojisindeki performansı üzerinde bir araştırma. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Tarım Bilimleri Dergisi 23(3): 222-228
• Ozcagiran, R., Unal, A., Ozeker, E., Isfendiyaroglu, M., 2004. Pear. Temperate Fruit Trees (Pome Fruits) Volume-II. Ege University Agriculture Faculty Publications Number:556, Bornova-Izmir, Turkey, 73-126 (In Turkish).
• Ozturk, I., Ercisli, S., Kalkan, F., Demir, B., 2009. Some chemical and physico-mechanical properties of pear cultivars. African Journal of Biotechnology 8(4):687-693.
• Şen, F., Ünal, A., Arda, E., 2009. Bursa yöresinde yetiştirilen 'Deveci' armut çeşidinin yöresel olgunluk durumlarının saptanması üzerinde bir araştırma. Anadolu 19(2):33-48 ve depolama
• Stern, R.A., Doron, I. 2009. Performance of ‘Coscia’ pear (Pyrus communis) on nine rootstocks in the north of Israel.Scientia Horticulture 119:252–256.
• Urbina, V., Dalmases, J., Pascual, M., Dalmau, R., 2003.Performance of `Williams' pear on five rootstocks. Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology 78(2): 193-196
• Webster, A.D. 1998. A brief review of pear rootstock development. Acta Horticulturae 475:135-142.
• Yılmaz, M., 1994. Bahçe Bitkileri Yetiştirme Tekniği. Çukurova Üniversitesi Basımevi, Adana, 151s.