4.0 Article

Yield performance of apple rootstocks of the Geneva series on replanting soil

Journal

PESQUISA AGROPECUARIA BRASILEIRA
Volume 53, Issue 8, Pages 924-933

Publisher

EMPRESA BRASIL PESQ AGROPEC
DOI: 10.1590/S0100-204X2018000800007

Keywords

Malus; burrknots; fruit production; Fuji Suprema cultivar; Galaxy cultivar; suckers

Funding

  1. Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuaria e Extensao Rural de Santa Catarina (Epagri)
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa e Inovacao do Estado de Santa Catarina (Fapesc)
  3. Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos (Finep)
  4. Associacao Brasileira de Produtores de Maca (ABPM)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The objective of this work was to identify rootstocks with competitive agronomic potential to substitute those currently used in Southern Brazil for the Galaxy and Fuji Suprema apple scion cultivars cultivated on replanting soils. The experiment was carried out in the municipality of Lebon Regis, in the state of Santa Catarina, Brazil, from the 2009/2010 to the 2014/2015 crop season, in a randomized complete block design, with four replicates. The yield performance of the 'Galaxy' and 'Fuji Suprema' scions grafted on the G.056, G.202, G.213, G.814, G.896, G.969, M.9, and Marubakaido/M.9 rootstocks was evaluated. G.896 and G.814 stood out due to their superior annual and cumulative fruit yields, as well as to their greater yield regularity, although they showed lower ability of dwarfing the scion. The greatest average fruit weight of 'Galaxy' was obtained on G.056 and G.213. For 'Fuji Suprema', G.969 promoted smaller fruits, whereas the other rootstocks did not differ. All the evaluated rootstocks produced less suckers than Marubakaido/M.9 and less burrknots than M.9 and Marubakaido/M.9. In general, on replanting soil conditions, G.202 is promising among dwarfing rootstocks, mainly for 'Fuji Suprema'. G.056, G.814, and G.896 also stand out, and the two first are more specific for 'Fuji Suprema'.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available