Plum Cultivar Evaluation on Myrobalan Rootstock in Lithuania

Open access

Abstract

Twenty plum cultivars on Myrobalan (Prunus cerasifera Ehrh.) seedling rootstock were tested in 2012–2017 at the Institute of Horticulture of the Lithuanian Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry. Plum trees were spaced at 4.5 × 2.5 m and trained as spindles. Orchard floor management included frequent mowing of grass in the alleyways with herbicide strips along tree rows. ‘Duke of Edinburgh’, ‘Kijevas Vēlā’, ‘Dąbrowicka Prune’, ‘Čačanska Najbolje’, ‘and ‘Štaro Vengrinė’ cultivars were the most vigorous plum trees at the end of 6th year. Their trunk diameter achieved 92–96 mm. ‘Valor’, ‘Queen Victoria’, ‘Herman’, ‘Čačanska Najbolje’, ‘Favorita del Sultano’, ‘Ave’, and ‘Jubileum’ cultivars had the lowest trunk diameter — 72–78 mm. The highest cumulative yield of four fruiting years was recorded for ‘Kometa’ and ‘Violeta’ cultivars, respectively, 43.0 and 46.5 kg/tree. ‘Favorita del Sultano’, ‘Rausvė’, and ‘Kijevas Vēlā’ produced the largest fruits — 52–60 g. The smallest fruit occurred on ‘Dąbrowicka Prune’ and ‘Herman’ cultivars, respectively, 22 and 25 g. ‘Dąbrowicka Prune’ had the highest soluble solids content (SSC) — 19.5%. The least SSC was recorded in ‘Kometa’, ‘Violeta’ and ‘Herman’ fruits — 10.6–11.8%. ‘Renklod Rannij Doneckij’, ‘Čačanska Najbolje’, and ‘Valor’ cultivars had the highest fruit flesh firmness.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Dēķena D. Poukh A.V. Kahu K. Laugale V. Alsiņa I. (2017). Influence of rootstocks on plum productivity in different growing regions. Proc. Latvian Acad. Sci. Section B71 (No. 3) 233–236.

  • Erogul D. Sen F. (2015). Effects of gibberellic acid treatments on fruit thinning and fruitquality in Japanese plum (Prunus salicina Lindl.). Sci. Horticult. 186 137–142.

  • Glisic I. Milošević T. Mratinić E. Paunovic G. Glišić I. (2012). Vigour yield components and fruit weight of some plum (Prunus domestica L.) cultivars during early years after planting. In: Proceedings of the Third International Scientific Symposium “Agrosym Jahorina 2012” 1517 November 2012 Jahorina Bosnia and Herzegovina pp. 122–127.

  • Głowacka A. Rozpara E. (2017). Evaluation of several dessert cultivars of plum new under climatic conditions of Poland. Horticult. Sci.44 (3) 126–132.

  • Grāvīte I. Kaufmane E. (2017). Evaluation of German plum selections in Latvia. Proc. Latvian Acad. Sci. Section B71 (3) 166–172.

  • Hjalmarsson I. Trajkovski V. Wallace B. (2008). Adaptation of foreign plum and cherry varieties in Sweden. In: Proceedings of International Scientific Conference “Sustainable Fruit Growing: From Plant To Product” 2831 May 2008 JūrmalaDobele Latvia pp. 141–148.

  • Janes H. Kahu K. (2008). Winter injuries of plum cultivars in winters 2005–2007 in Estonia. In: Proceedings of International Scientific Conference “Sustainable Fruit Growing: From Plant To Product” 2831 May 2008 JūrmalaDobele Latvia pp. 149–153.

  • Jänes H. Klaas L. Pae A. (2007). Winter hardiness of plum on different rootstocks in winter 2002/2003 in Estonia. Acta Hortic. 734 295–298.

  • Kaufmane E. Skrivele M. Rubauskis E. Ikase L. (2007). The yield and fruit quality of two plum cultivars on different rootstocks. Sodininkystė ir Daržininkystė 26 (3) 10–15.

  • Lacis G. Kaufmane E. Kota I. Gravite I. Trajkovski V. (2012). Genetic diversity and plasticity in selected progeny of plum cultivar ‘Jubileum’. Acta Hortic. 935 129–135.

  • Markuszewski B. Kopytowski J. (2013). Evaluation of plum in the northeast of Poland. Folia Hort. 25 (2) 101–106.

  • Milošević T. Milošević N. Glišić I. (2013). Agronomic properties and nutritional status of plum trees (Prunus domestica L.) influenced by different cultivars. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 13 (3) 706–714.

  • Milošević T. Milošević N. (2018). Plum (Prunus spp.) breeding. In: Al-Khayri J. M. Jain S. M. Johnson D. V. (eds.). Advances in Plant Breeding Strategies: Fruits. Springer pp. 165–216.

  • Plich H. (2006). Ethylene production and storage potential in ‘Cacanska Najbolja’ plums. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res.14 (2) 229–236.

  • Rakićević M. Miletić R. Pešaković M. (2008). Productive properties of some major plum cultivars grown in the region of central Serbia. In: Proceedings of International Scientific Conference “Sustainable Fruit Growing: From Plant To Product” 2831 May 2008 JūrmalaDobele Latvia pp. 83–91.

  • Sosna I. (2002). Growth and cropping of four plum cultivars on different rootstocks in south western Poland. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res.10 95–103.

  • Świerczyński S. Stachowiak A. (2009). The usefulness of two rootstocks for some plum cultivars. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res.17 (2) 63–71.

  • Vangdal E. (1985). Quality criteria for fruit for fresh consumption. Acta Agricult. Scand. 35 (1) 41–47.

  • Vangdal E. Flatland S. Hjeltnes S. H. Sivertsen H. (2007a). Consumers’ preferences for new plum cultivars (Prunus domestica L.). Acta Hortic. 734 169–172.

  • Vangdal E. Døving A. Måge F. (2007b). The fruit quality of plums (Prunus domestica L.) as related to yield and climatic conditions. Acta Hortic. 734 425–429.

  • Wright H. Nichols D. Embree C. (2006). Evaluating the accountability of trunk size and canopy volume models for determining apple tree production potential across diverse management regimes. Acta Hortic. 707 237–243.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.3

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.137
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.192

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 119 119 7
PDF Downloads 75 75 3