See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315734489 Vegetative and reproductive traits of young peaches and nectarines grown under red photoselective net Article · January 2016 CITATIONS READS 0 10 6 authors, including: Mushtaque Jatoi Tomislav Jemrić 20 PUBLICATIONS 19 CITATIONS 104 PUBLICATIONS 194 CITATIONS University of Zagreb SEE PROFILE University of Zagreb SEE PROFILE Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects: LIFE+ SU.SA.FRUIT - Low pesticide IPM in sustainable and safe fruit production http://www.lifesusafruit.eu/index.html View project Phytosanitary measures against quarantine pests View project All content following this page was uploaded by Tomislav Jemrić on 01 April 2017. The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately. PRELIMINARY COMMUNICATION Vegetative and Reproductive Traits of Young Peaches and Nectarines Grown under Red Photoselective Net Marko VUKOVIĆ 1 Mia BRKLJAČA 2( ) Jasna RUMORA 2 Mladen FRUK 1 Mushtaque A. JATOI 1,3 Tomislav JEMRIĆ 1 Summary he efect of red photoselective net on yield per tree (g), yield eiciency (g·cm-2) leaf surface (cm2), fruit diameter (mm), fruit mass (g), fruit irmness (kg·cm-2) and soluble solids concentration (SSC) (%Brix) on young peach (‘Sugar Time’) and nectarine (‘Big Bang’) trees was studied. No signiicant diferences were recorded for yield, yield eiciency and SSC on peach as well for all fruit quality parameters on nectarine. Both peach and nectarine trees grown under red net had signiicantly higher leaf surface (37.82 and 40.72 cm2, respectively) than in control (23.85 and 26.14 cm2 , respectively). Peach fruits grown under red net had signiicantly higher fruit diameter (70.97 mm), fruit mass (163.73 g) and lower fruit irmness (2.12 kg·cm-2) than in control (65.24 mm, 135.84 g, and 3.04 kg·cm-2 , respectively). It was concluded that red photoselective net has a positive efect on vegetative growth of peach and nectarine, and on majority of fruit quality parameters of peach, while on nectarine fruit quality there are no evident diferences. Further research must be continued to verify these preliminary indings. Key words nectarine, peach, photoselective net, fruit quality 1 University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Pomology, Svetošimunska cesta 25, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia 2 University of Zadar, Department of Ecology, Agronomy and Aquaculture, Trg Kneza Višeslava 9, 23000 Zadar, Croatia e-mail: mbrkljaca@unizd.hr 3 Shah Abdul Latif University, Date Palm Research Institute, 66020, Khairpur, Pakistan Received: March 12, 2017 | Accepted: March 21, 2017 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study was carried out with a contribution of the LIFE financial instrument of the European Union for the project “Low pesticide IPM in sustainable and safe fruit production” (Contract No. LIFE13 ENV/HR/000580). Agriculturae Conspectus Scientiicus . Vol. 81 (2016) No. 3 (181-185) 181 182 Marko VUKOVIĆ, Mia BRKLJAČA, Jasna RUMORA, Mladen FRUK, Mushtaque A. JATOI, Tomislav JEMRIĆ Introduction he use of nets in fruit production to cover fruit trees is of prime importance nowadays. he industrial production of nets used in agriculture has been constantly increased in Europe. Just for example, in Italy, the annual production of HDPE nets for agriculture application is more than 5300 t (Castellano et al., 2008). he traditional usage of nets in agricultural practices was mainly for protection against hail and wind (Middleton and McWaters, 2002). According to Briassoulis et al. (2007), the oldest usage of nets in protected cultivation was in vineyards, peach, apricot, apple and cherry orchards as well as in production of cut lowers. Besides its traditional usage for protection against hail and wind, nets are nowadays particularly used for protection against rain, insects, birds and excessive solar radiation (Briassoulis et al., 2007). he usage of photoselective nets for protection against pests has been explored in recent years (Sauphanor et al., 2012). For protection against pests, the whole orchard is closed with nets that present mechanical barrier. Even if the both sides of orchards are let open, there is signiicant reduction of population of codling moth (Cydia pomonella (Linnaeus, 1758) in apple orchards (Graf et al., 1999). Peach (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch.) and nectarine (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch. var. nucipersica (Suckow) C.K. Schneid) are very popular fruits. In many production areas of peach and nectarine hail presents one of main threats in production. herefore, many producers protect their orchard by nets. If orchard is protected against hail, it can also be protected against pests with little more efort. Quality of any fruit is mainly related to their biochemical composition and hence it is of special importance for consumer satisfaction e.g. as in case of peaches (Crisosto et al., 2003; Crisosto and Crisosto, 2005). According to Basile et al. (2012), photoselective nets are made up of materials that afects light specter that passes through them and causes light scattering. Iglesias and Alegre (2006) and Solomakhin and Blanke (2008) have reported that the photoselective nets can have quantitative and qualitative efect on light that reaches to the fruit trees. Few studies have proved that quantitative and qualitative modiication of light can afect physiology, yield and vegetative growth of many fruit species (Erez and Kadman-Zahavi, 1972; Rapparini et al., 1999; Jifon and Syversten, 2003) which are directly or indirectly related to the quality of fruits. heir possible efect in increasing yield and fruit quality in young orchards is of special importance due to faster economic return of investment in orchard plantation. However, there is scarcity of studies available regarding the efect of such photoselective nets on fruit quality as well on vegetative growth of peaches and nectarines. For example, Schettini (2011) investigated efect of ive coloured nets on one-year-old bare root peach ‘Messapia’ trees grown in plastic pots. Similarly, Giaccone et al. (2012) studied the efect of red and white photoselective net on mature ‘Laura’ nectarine trees. In addition, Shahak et al. (2004) investigated the efect of ive diferent coloured nets on 7-year-old ‘Hermosa’ peach trees. he main goal of this study was to investigate efect of red photoselective net used for hail and pest protection on fruit quality and vegetative growth of young peach and nectarine trees. In this study red net was used because, in comparison with other nets, it showed mainly positive efects on apple (‘Cripps Pink’) yield and fruit quality in same environmental conditions (Brkljača et al., 2016). Materials and methods Plant material he trial was established in private orchard near Donji Kašić (44°09ƍ04ƎN 15°28ƍ23ƎE) in season 2016 on the 3 years old fruit trees of peach (‘Sugar Time’) and nectarine (‘Big Bang’) grated on rootstock GF 677. Peach and nectarine trees were trained as spindle bush with a spacing of 0.8 m in row and 3 m between rows. Covering the trees with red photoselective net (AGRITECH S.r.l., Eboly, Italy) with mesh size of 2.4 × 4.8 mm was used as a treatment and uncovered trees served as control. Peaches and nectarines were harvested on 16 June 2016. Morphological and chemical analysis or measurements Yield was measured on site in orchard, while the samples were collected for determining the fruit quality parameters at the lab of University of Zadar, Croatia. Leaf surface (cm2) was measured on 10 randomly selected leaves from middle part of one-year old shoots before leaf fall using planimeter. Trunk cross sectional area (TCSA) was calculated from trunk diameter measured with digital caliper at the end of vegetation on the height of 25 cm from soil surface. Yield was measured on ive trees per each treatment. TCSA measurements were taken from the same trees on which yield was measured. Yield eiciency was calculated from yield and TCSA and expressed as g·cm-2. Fruit quality parameters that were measured were: fruit diameter, fruit mass, fruit irmness and total soluble solids concentration (SSC). Fruit diameter, fruit mass, fruit irmness and SSC were measured on 15 fruit samples per each treatment. Fruit diameter was measured with digital caliper, fruit mass on analytical balance (OHAUS Adventurer AX2202, Ohaus Corporation Parsippani, NJ, USA) with accuracy of 0.01 g. SSC was measured using ATAGO 3810 PAL-1 digital refractometer (ATAGO, Tokyo, Japan) and expressed as %Brix. Firmness was measured using PCE - PTR-200 (PCE Instruments, Jupiter/Palm Beach, USA) itted with 7.9 mm diameter plunger and expressed in kg·cm-2. Statistical analysis Data were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the signiicance of diferences between treatment and control were obtained with Student’s t-test using SAS statistical sotware ver. 9.4 (SAS Institute, NC). Results and discussion he ANOVA revealed that the fruit type (T) was signiicant for yield, yield eiciency, fruit diameter, fruit mass, fruit irmness and SSC. Netting (N) was signiicant for leaf surface, fruit diameter and fruit mass. T × N interaction was signiicant for yield and fruit irmness only (Table 1). TCSA was not signiicant and hence data is not shown here. Despite the low number of traits signiicantly afected by T × N interaction, to better elucidate the Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 81 (2016) No. 3 Vegetative and Reproductive Traits of Young Peaches and Nectarines Grown under Red Photoselective Net Table 1. ANOVA table for vegetative and reproductive traits of young peach ‘Sugar Top’ and nectarine ‘Big Bang’ grown under red photoselective net Source of variability Leaf surface (cm2) Yield (g) n.s. *** n.s. *** n.s. * Peach Nectarine 29.76±9.08 35.75±9.73 937.13±379.50 2146.27±624.55 Control Red net 24.99±5.25 39.92±7.33 1571.29±1063.02 1517.04±539.01 Fruit type (T) Netting (N) T×N Yield efficiency (g·cm-2) Fruit diameter (mm) *** *** n.s. * n.s. n.s. Fruit type (mean±SD) 27.97±15.07 68.11±6.94 57.61±11.03 58.65±4.52 Netting (mean±SD) 40.88±22.18 61.69±6.21 44.37±18.65 65.07±8.39 Fruit mass (g) Firmness (kg· cm-2) SSC (% Brix) *** * n.s. *** n. s. * ** n.s. n.s. 149.79±38.93 115.53±12.98 2.58±1.15 3.75±0.75 8.19±1.17 8.94±1.19 124.50±30.41 140.82±35.05 3.33±1.04 3.00±1.21 8.46±1.29 8.68±1.17 n.s., *, **, *** - not significant or significant at P ≤ 0.05, 0.01 and 0.001, respectively. efects of red photoselective nets on peach and nectarine, further analysis was performed on each fruit tree species separately. Both peach and nectarine trees had signiicantly higher leaf surface under red net (37.82±5.41 and 40.72±7.87 cm2 , respectively) than in control (23.85±6.16 and 26.14±4.04 cm2 , respectively) (Figure 1). Giaccone et al. (2012) reported that mean leaf size of nectarine trees was higher under the red net than under white net. However, they did not compare their results with the control trees (uncovered trees), and hence can be partly comparable with our indings. However, it still can be said that the red photoselective net had positive efect on leaf surface, which can further increase the photosynthetic capacity. TCSA showed no signiicant diferences between red net and control in both peach and nectarine (data not shown). Peach trees under red net had higher yield (1130.00±340.00 g) than in control (710.00±300.00 g) whereas nectarine trees in control had higher yield (2440.00±760.00 g) than under red net (1900.00±400.00 g), but no signiicant diferences were recorded. According to Schettini (2011), peach trees under red net had signiicantly higher yield than trees in control, which is in agreement to our results. Giaccone et al. (2012) reported that fruit yield of nectarine ‘Laura’ was not signiicantly afected by the type of anti-hail net. However, due to the preliminary status of this study, and possible efect of red net on bud diferentiation, the true efect of red net on yield will be possible to evaluate next year. Another important factor inluencing our results is high yield variability (Table 1) caused by young fruit age. We expect that when yield will be stabilized, red netting might positively inluence the yield of peach and nectarine. Peach trees under red net had higher yield eiciency (0.03±0.02 g·cm-2) than in control (0.02±0.01 g·cm-2) whereas nectarine fruits under red net and in control had same value (0.06±0.01 g·cm– 2). For this parameter, no signiicant diferences were recorded. Giaccone et al. (2012) reported that crop load of nectarine ‘Laura’ was not signiicantly afected by the type of anti-hail net which is in agreement with our indings. Peach fruit grown under red net had signiicantly higher fruit diameter (70.97±6.15 mm) than in control (65.24±6.67 mm). Nectarine fruit grown under red net had slightly higher fruit diameter (59.16±5.77 mm) than in control (58.15±2.9 mm), but no signiicant diferences were recorded (Figure 2). Figure 1. Leaf surface (cm2) of young peach ‘Sugar Top’ and nectarine ‘Big Bang’ grown under red photoselective net. (***- significant at P ≤ 0.001 level, according to Student’s t-test within fruit species) Figure 2. Fruit diameter (mm) of young peach ‘Sugar Top’ and nectarine ‘Big Bang’ grown under red photoselective net. (n.s., * –nonsignificant or significant at P ≤ 0.05 level, according to Student’s t-test within fruit species) Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 81 (2016) No. 3 183 184 Marko VUKOVIĆ, Mia BRKLJAČA, Jasna RUMORA, Mladen FRUK, Mushtaque A. JATOI, Tomislav JEMRIĆ Figure 3. Fruit mass (g) of young peach ‘Sugar Top’ and nectarine ‘Big Bang’ grown under red photoselective net. (n.s., * –nonsignificant or significant at P ≤ 0.05 level, according to Student’s t-test within fruit species) Figure 4. Fruit firmness (kg·cm–2) of young ‘Sugar Top’ and nectarine ‘Big Bang’ grown under red photoselective net. (n.s., * –nonsignificant or significant at P ≤ 0.05 level, according to Student’s t-test within fruit species) Peach fruit grown under red net had signiicantly higher fruit mass (163.73±36.42 g) than in control (135.84±37.37 g). Nectarine fruits under red net also had higher fruit mass (117.91±9.71 g) than in control (113.16±15.59 g), but no signiicant diferences were recorded (Figure 3). According to Shahak et al. (2004), fruits of peach ‘Hermosa’ had higher fruit mass under red net (153.4 g) than in control (141.7 g), but no signiicant diferences were recorded between them. Schettini (2011) reported that peach ‘Messapia’ trees grown under red net had higher fruit weight (210 g) than in control (207 g), however no signiicant diferences were recorded between them. Giaccone et al. (2012) reported that fruit mass of nectarine ‘Laura’ was not signiicantly afected by the type of anti-hail net (red and white). Possible explanation of signiicant diference in peach fruit mass obtained in our study might be the genetic diferences and/or climatic conditions that in combination with red photoselective net and young tree age caused changes on peach fruit. As, the results obtained in kiwifruit and reported by Basile et al. (2012) conirm our indings with peaches. he authors found that the fruit mass of kiwifruit ‘Hayward’ grown under red net was signiicantly higher than in control in irst year of study, although in second year no signiicant diferences were recorded. herefore, our results need to be validated during few seasons and on multiple locations to bring inal conclusions in this regard. Peach fruit harvested from control trees had signiicantly higher irmness (3.04±1.22 kg·cm-2) than those harvested from trees grown under the red net (2.12±0.89 kg·cm-2) suggesting fruit ripening acceleration in fruits grown under red net, contrary to results reported by Schettini (2011) who found that peach fruit grown under red net had signiicantly higher lesh irmness (4.56 kg·cm-2) than fruit harvested from control trees (3.2 kg·cm-2). Similarly, Giaccone et al. (2012) reported that lesh irmness of nectarine fruits was signiicantly lower under white net than under red net, which is also contrary to our results. Our results on nectarine show that, although fruits grown under the red net had higher irmness (3.89±0.74 kg·cm-2) than those grown in control (3.62±0.75 kg·cm-2), no signiicant diference was recorded (Figure 4). However, Basile et al. (2012) reported signiicantly lower fruit irmness of kiwifruit ‘Hayward’ grown under red net in comparison to control or uncovered trees, which is in agreement with our results obtained in peaches. Peach fruits in control had higher SSC (8.23±1.48 %Brix) than under red net (8.15±0.79 %Brix) while nectarine fruits under red net had higher SSC (9.2±1.28 %Brix) than in control (8.69±1.07 %Brix), but diferences were not signiicant. Giaccone et al. (2012) reported that fruit SSC was signiicantly higher in trees under the white net than under the red net which is contrary to our results. Similar results were reported by Basile et. al (2012) who found that signiicantly higher fruit SSC of kiwifruit ‘Hayward’ under red net than in control. Possible diferences in fruit reaction to red netting found in our study might be also explained by genetic and/or climatic diferences, as well by tree age. Conclusion he obtained results have shown that red nets have signiicant inluence on vegetative (leaf surface) and some fruit quality parameters (fruit diameter, fruit mass and irmness). Majority of signiicant diferences were recorded on peach fruit quality parameters while on nectarine only minor number of parameters was signiicantly afected. It is probably due to young tree age and therefore red photoselective nets didn’t show their whole efect. Hence, further research is needed to validate these preliminary indings as the red photoselective nets have shown some good trends towards vegetative and some fruit quality parameters of young peach trees. References Basile B., Giaccone M., Cirillo C., Ritieni A., Graziani G., Shahak Y., Forlani M. (2012). Photo-selective hail nets afect fruit size and quality in Hayward kiwifruit. Sci Hort. 141: 91–97. Briassoulis D., Mistriotis A., Elet herakis D. (2007). Mechanical behaviour and properties of agricultural nets. Part II: Analysis of the performance of the main categories of agricultural nets. Polym Test. 26: 970–984. Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 81 (2016) No. 3 Vegetative and Reproductive Traits of Young Peaches and Nectarines Grown under Red Photoselective Net Brkljača M., Rumora J., Vuković M., Jemrić, T. (2016). he efect of photoselective nets on fruit quality of apple cv. ‘Cripps Pink’. Agric Conspec Sci. 81: 87-90. Castellano S., Scarascia Mugnozza G., Russo G., Briassoulis D., Mistriotis A., Hemming S., Waaijenberg D. (2008). Plastic nets in agriculture: a general review of typologies and applications. Biosyst Eng. 24: 799-808. Crisosto C. H., Crisosto G. M. (2005). Relationship between ripe soluble solids concentration (RSSC) and consumer acceptance of high and low acid melting lesh peach and nectarine (Prunus persica (L.) Batsch) cultivars. Postharvest Biol Technol. 38: 239-246. Crisosto C. H., Crisosto G., Bowerman E. (2003). Understanding consumer acceptance of peach, nectarine and plum cultivars. Acta Hortic. 604: 115-119. Erez A., Kadman-Zahavi A. (1972). Growth of Peach Plants under Diferent Filtered Sunlight Conditions. Physiol. Plant. 26: 210-214. Giaccone M., Forlani M., Basile B. (2012). Tree vigor, fruit yield and quality of nectarine trees grown under red photoselective antihail nets in Southern Italy. Acta Hortic. 962. 287-293 Graf B., Hopli H., Rauscher S., Hohn H. (1999). Hail nets inluence the migratory behaviour of codling moth and leaf roller. Obstund Weinbau 135: 289–292. Iglesias I., Alegre S. (2006). he efect of anti-hail nets on fruit production, radiation, temperature, quality and proitability of “Mondial Gala” apples. Journal of Applied Horticulture 8: 91 -100. Jifon J. L., Syvertsen J. P. (2003). Moderate shade can increase net gas exchange and reduce photoinhibition in citrus leaves. Tree Physiol. 23: 119-127. Middleton S., McWaters A. (2002). Hail netting of apple orchards – Australian Experience. he Compact Fruit Tree 35: 51 – 55 Rapparini F., Rotondi A., Baraldi R. (1999). Blue light regulation of the growth of Prunus persica plants in a long term experiment: morphological and histological observations. Trees 14: 169-176. Sauphanor, B., Severac, G., Maugin, S., Toubon, J. F. and Capowiez, Y. (2012), Exclusion netting may alter reproduction of the codling moth (Cydia pomonella) and prevent associated fruit damage to apple orchards. Entomol Exp Appl. 145: 134–142. Schettini, E. (2011). Nets for peach protected cultivation. J Ag Eng. Riv di Ing Agr. 4: 25-31. Solomakhin A., Blanke M. M. (2008). Coloured hailnets alter light transmission, spectra and phytochrome, as well as vegetative growth, leaf chlorophyll and photosynthesis and reduce lower induction of apple. J. Plant Growth Regul. 56: 211–218. Shahak, Y., Gussakovsky, E.E., Cohen, Y., Lurie, S., Stern, R., Kir, S., Naor, A., Atzmon, I., Doron, I. and Greenblat-Avron, Y. (2004) Colornets: A new approach for light manipulation in fruit trees. Acta Hortic. 636: 609-616. acs81_30 Agric. conspec. sci. Vol. 81 (2016) No. 3 View publication stats 185