4.7 Article

Fruit growth, yield and oil quality changes induced by deficit irrigation at different stages of olive fruit development

期刊

AGRICULTURAL WATER MANAGEMENT
卷 212, 期 -, 页码 88-98

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.agwat.2018.08.022

关键词

Deficit irrigation; Fatty acids; Leaf water potential; Lignans; Olea europaea L.; Ortho-diphenols

资金

  1. Project OLEA - Genomics and Breeding of Olive (Ministero delle politiche agricole, alimentari e forestali) [D.M.27011/7643/10]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Experiments were performed in a high-density olive orchard to compare the effect of regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) at two different phenological stages with fully-irrigated trees (FI) over two years. Stress was imposed either prior to pit hardening (RDI 1) or after endocarp sclerification during the initial phase of oil accumulation (RDI 2). Fully irrigated trees received 2277 and 1648 m(3) ha(-1) in 2012 and 2013, respectively, RDI 1 ones 76 and 53% of those volumes in 2012 and 2013, respectively (RDI 2 trees 48 and 67%). There were no differences in fruit set or return bloom due to the irrigation regime. At harvest differences in fruit size between FI and RDI treatments were significant only in the first year. The fruit yields of RDI 1 and RDI 2 trees were 70 and 81% of FI ones, respectively (means of two years), but the yield efficiency was similar across all treatments. The phenolic concentration in RDI 1 fruits was higher than that in fruits from trees subjected to the other water regimes. Verbascoside, 3-4 DHPEA-EDA, and oleuropein of RDI 1 fruits were higher in 2012 (only verbascoside in 2013). Oleuropein and 3-4 DHPEA-EDA of RDI treatments were higher than those of FI in 2013. Higher concentrations of biophenols were measured in oils from RDI 1 trees in both years, whereas FI and RDI 2 showed similar values. An early water stress was more effective to increase the phenolic concentration of olive oil compared with a late deficit or full irrigation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据