Pruning residuals: their role in the micronutrient budget of Clementine mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco)
Öz
Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the micronutrient (Fe, Cu, Mn and Zn) amounts removed with pruning residuals in Clementine mandarin (Citrus reticulata Blanco) grafted on bitter orange.
Material and Methods: In order to meet the above objective , at the end of two production seasons (2015 and 2016), measurements and analyses were carried out by collecting pruning residual samples from 50 groves located in the province of İzmir and Aydın (Turkey).
Results: While the biomass value varied between 2.90 and 4.90 kg/tree in the 1st year, it varied in the range of 3.00-5.00 kg/tree in the 2nd year. The concentration (mg kg-1) values for the first year were as Fe: 44-115, Cu: 11-32, Mn: 33-75, Zn: 17-26, while these for the second year were Fe: 48-101, Cu: 16-38, Mn: 40-88 and Zn: 20-30. The yield value was 64-102 kg/tree for the 1st year and 65-94 kg/tree for the 2nd year.
Conclusion: The mean values of the microelement amounts removed with pruning residuals may be listed as Fe > Mn > Zn = Cu for both years. The micronutrient amount removed with pruning residuals (g/tree) was found to be Fe: 0.15-0.41, Cu: 0.04-0.13, Mn: 0.12-0.3 and Zn: 0.05-0.13 for the 1st year and Fe: 0.16-0.44, Cu: 0.06-0.16, Mn: 0.15-0.36 and Zn: 0.07-0.13 for the 2nd year. It is suggested that these amounts should be included in plant fertilization programs.
Anahtar Kelimeler
pruning, Clementine mandarin, microelement concentration in pruning residuals, amount of micro elements in pruning residuals
Kaynakça
- Badrulhisham, N. & N. Othman, 2016. “Knowledge in Tree Pruning for Sustainable Practices, 210-217”. In: Urban Setting: Improving our Quality of Life. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences,. 234 pp.
- CIRCE-CERTH, 2018. Biomass from agricultural pruning and plantation removals. A feasible practice promoted by the uprunning project (Web page:https://www.up-running.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/1st-Monograph_vDEF-2.pdf) (Date accessed: March 2021).
- Clark, J. & N. Matheny, 2010. The research basis to pruning: A review of the literature. Arboriculture and Urban Forestry, 35 (3): 110-120.
- Close, D.D., J.W. Groninger, J. C. Mangun & P.L. Roth, 2001. Homeowners’ opinions on the practice and effects of topping trees. Journal of Arboriculture, 27: 160-165.
- Cohen, J., 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd. Ed.). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 567 pp.
- FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), 1997. The role of wood energy in Europe and OECD, WETT-Wood Energy Today for Tomorrow. Rome: FOPW, Forestry Department. (Web page: http://www.fao.org/3/w7407e/W7407e03.htm#10 ) (Date accessed: March 2021).
- Gilman, E.F. & J.C. Grabosky, 2006. Branch union morphology affects decay following pruning. Journal of Arboriculture, 32 (2): 74-79.
- Icka, P. & R. Damo, 2018. The Utilization of The Vineyards' Pruning Residuals for Bioenergy. Albanian Conference on Biology & Environment, (KShBM-ACBE 2018): 1-11.
- Jensen, E.V., 2000. The effects of information on Danish forest visitors’ acceptance of various management actions. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research, 73: 165-172.
- Kacar, B. & A. İnal, 2008. Plant Analyses (in Turkish: Bitki Analizleri). 2nd Edt. Nobel Press. Ankara. 912 s.
