See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/311064832

Role of Rootstocks in Fruit Production–A Review

Article · July 2016

CITATIONS READS
34 27,268

5 authors, including:

P. K. Nimbolkar Subhash Chander

Central Agricultural University Punjab Agricultural University
24 PUBLICATIONS   123 CITATIONS    22 PUBLICATIONS   68 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Crop regulation and source sink relation studies in Annona View project

Organic farming practices for sustainable horticulture Vol 3 View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Subhash Chander on 28 November 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Agricultural Engineering and Food Technology
p-ISSN: 2350-0085; e-ISSN: 2350-0263; Volume 3, Issue 3; July-September, 2016 pp. 183-188
© Krishi Sanskriti Publications
http://www.krishisanskriti.org/Publication.html

Role of Rootstocks in Fruit Production–A Review

P. K. Nimbolkar1, Chandrakant Awachare2, Y.T.N Reddy3, Subhash Chander4 and Firoz Hussain5
1,2,3,4,5
Division of Fruit Crops Indian Institute of Horticulture Research, Bangalore-560089
E-mail: 1prashantnimbolkar111@gmail.com

Abstract—Rootstocks play a crucial role in determining orchard and provide anchorage for the tree. Rootstocks determine tree
efficiency in fruit crops. Combining the desirable attributes of two size. Rootstocks can be used as interstems, a small piece
different plants by budding or grafting can produce different growth inserted between the rootstock and scion in propagation
effects. The effect of rootstock on fruit quality in terms of physical process. These trees are known as “three piece” trees. Inter-
traits and internal chemical compositions is well demonstrated in
temperate fruit crops (Apple, Pears, Cherry etc.) as compared to
stems can use to overcome incompatibility barriers between
tropical and subtropical fruit crops. This difference can illustrated by stock and scion and also it reduces the high vigour of desirable
comparing the relative importance of rootstocks for precocity, yield, rootstocks. Rootstocks may provide some degree of tolerance
and tree size control, and through contrasts in annual phenological to soils that are sometimes too wet or too dry. Identification
cycles, fruit respiratory behaviour, crop load and canopy and utilization of appropriate rootstocks in crops like apple,
management techniques. But these effects on physiological, pear, citrus, mango and grapes in relation to vigour
biochemical and molecular fronts are still not understood. This management, nutrient uptake, soil salinity, moisture stress and
review describes and discusses the rootstock effects on scion growth, yield efficiency has been already studied in several countries.
vigour and habit, as well as scion precocity and abundance of Rootstocks with immense potential for commercial
flowering, the propensity of flowers to set fruits and yield efficiency
in important fruits crops which are grown commercially in India.
exploitation are yet to be utilized to its full potential most of
the commercial fruit crops in India. Therefore, it is important
1. INTRODUCTION step to find a rootstock with the maximum desirable
characteristics to meet the set of environmental conditions
At present, horticulture is recognized as a potential sector to where the tree is to be grown. It means a root-stock considered
enhance agricultural production, improve house hold best for a certain variety and environmental conditions may
nutritional security and income generation through not be a best choice for some other variety and environmental
diversification and employment, value addition and export. regime. This review mainly emphasizing on several studies,
Inspite of the enormous success achieved in horticulture which are principally focused on effects of rootstocks on scion
sector, several constraints still exist. Besides new emerging growth and cropping, which would help to focus and
challenges, poor productivity per unit area continues to be a coordinate future studies in this area.
concern in most of the horticultural crops with climate change
impacting the productivity further. There is need to address 2. ROLE OF ROOTSTOCKS IN MANGO
these issues in the area of biotic and abiotic stresses and their
impact on different horticultural crops. Mango is one of the most important tropical fruit of the world
which is known as ‘king of fruits’ in India. Some attempts
The role of rootstocks and its use in different fruit crops has have been made to standardize the rootstocks for various scion
significant impact on fruit crop production by influencing varieties including the use of polyembryonic varieties for
canopy architecture, nutritional uptake, flowering, yield and vigour management, salinity and drought tolerance as well as
fruit quality [29]. Besides, it can also confront biotic and to improve fruit yield and quality. Vigour management plays
abiotic stresses such as soil pathogens, thermal stress, salinity an important role in mango, especially for high density
and nutritional stress [28]. Due to limited availability of arable planting and orchard management in terms of canopy
land and high market demand for fruit crops, they are management, harvesting and plant protection measures.
frequently cultivated under unfavorable soil and According to [16] growth and bearing habit of ‘Dashehari’
environmental conditions like thermal stress, drought, mango on the seedling stock of ‘Dashehari’ itself, showed
flooding, salinity and contamination of organic pollutants. One most vigorous nature and highest yield compare to other
way to substantiate or reduce these losses in production would polyembryonic rootstocks. Similar results were reported from
be the use of appropriate rootstocks, which are capable of IIHR- Bangalore, based on 21 years study on the performance
reducing the effect of external stresses on the scion [14]. of ‘Alphonso’ which indicated nucellar seedlings of
Rootstocks have a primary role in determining orchard ‘Muvandan’, ‘Bappakai’ and ‘Olour’ were vigorous rootstocks
efficiency. They are responsible for water and mineral uptake in decreasing order of vigour while ‘Vellaikulumban’ seedling
184 P. K. Nimbolkar, Chandrakant Awachare, Y.T.N Reddy, Subhash Chander and Firoz Hussain

imparted dwarfing in comparison to ‘Alphonso’ grafted on its Table 1: Characteristics of some selected citrus rootstocks [3].
own seedling [28]. Some factors like phenolic contents bark
percentage and chlorophyll fractions were found to be very Rootst Horticultural Reaction to
useful for determining the vigour of mango rootstocks at ock performance
nursery stage [1]. [21] suggested that selection of size Yi Qua Pla Ro Citru Trist Exoc S Drou R
controlling rootstocks at the nursery stage can be made by eld lity nt ot s eza ortis al ght o
vig ro nema t ot
assessing leaf water potential, total phenols/and or ABA. Fruit
our t tode sy
yield and productivity plays an important role in crops like st
mango where the productivity is very low in most of mango e
growing countries. [34] reported that yield and yield efficiency m
of ‘Kensington Pride’ was best on ‘Sg. Siput’ rootstock and it Rangp G M G M S R S R R D
was poor with Sabre rootstock indicated the possibilities for ur T
manipulating mango scion productivity through rootstock lime
genotypes. [27] found that ‘Sinamaica’ rootstock have the best Marm G M G M MT R S R R D
adaptability to agro-ecological conditions of Maracaibo plain alade T
of Venezuela and produce higher yield and production orange
Rough G L G S S R R T T D
efficiency with respect to different cultivars (Criollode Mara,
lemon
Manzana and Sensation mango). ‘Bappakai’ was found to be Cleop M M M T S R R M S M
best rootstock for ‘Dashehari’ followed by ‘Muvandan’ and atra T
‘EC 95862’ [6]. ‘Langra’ grafted on ‘Bappakai’ rootstock manda
recorded the highest fruits number/plant followed by rin
‘Vellaikulumban’ and ‘Chandrakaran’ [19]. Sour G G M R T HS T T MT D
orange
Fruit quality also important aspect and some studies were done Sweet M M G S MT S S S S M
on this aspect in different countries. Rootstock trial conducted lime
at IIHR, Bangalore for 21 years, indicated no significant effect Trifoli L M L R R R H H HS S
of rootstocks (Vellaikulumban, Bappakai, Chandrakaran, ate S H
Kurukan, Muvandan, Mylepelian and Olour) on fruit quality orange
of ‘Alphonso’ mango [28]. Screening of mango rootstocks to Troyer M G M M T MT S H HS S
salinity has shown that the polyembryonic cultivars ‘Olour’ citrang T S H
and ‘Bappakai’ could withstand higher level of salinity [24]. e
[8] reported that ‘Olour’ as best salt tolerant rootstock Carriz M G M M T MT S H HS S
compared to ‘Kurukan’. Mango cultivar ‘13-1’ was selected as o T S H
citrang
a polyembryonic (3-6 embryos) rootstock for calcareous soils e
or for irrigation with saline water. Mango trees on ‘13-1’ Sweet G G M H HS MT R S S M
rootstocks showed excellent performance on soil containing orange S
20% lime, three other cultivars on ‘13-1’ rootstock showed Karna G M M S MT - T T S D
good development on sandy soil with 10-20% lime [12]. [41] Khatta
indicated the greater capability of ‘Gomera-1’ rootstock to Nasna M G M S MT T R H S M
saline conditions. Seedlings from stone of ‘Kesar’ variety was ran T
found to be better with significantly highest survival G = good, M = Moderate, L = Poor or low, R = Resistant, T = Tolerant, MT =
Moderately tolerant, S = Susceptible, HS = Highly susceptible, D = Deep, M
percentage, germination percentage and growth parameters = Medium, SH = Shallow, - = No information
with higher salt concentrations of water [38].
4. ROLE OF ROOTSTOCKS IN GRAPES
3. ROLE OF ROOTSTOCKS IN CITRUS
Although grapevines can grow in soils with a wide range of
Role of rootstocks in citrus is one of the most debatable and pH (4.5-6.5), very acid soils present a problem. Based on vine
discussed issues and its selection is a major consideration growth, [15] found different responses of Vitis species or
under planning of any citrus orchard. One thing can be safely cultivars to low soil pH. The cultivars most tolerant to strong
said that choosing the right rootstocks is fundamental to the acid soils were V. labrusca cv. ‘Concord’ and ‘Catawba’,
success of the orchard. The citrus rootstock scenario in India along with rootstock ‘SO4’ and‘3309C’, and the hybrid
has been reviewed by [25]. The characteristics of some cultivar ‘Seyval’; V. vinifera ‘White Riesling’ and
selected rootstocks are given in Table 1. ‘Chardonnay’ were the most intolerant. The use of acid-
tolerant rootstocks, such as ‘SO4’ and ‘3309C’, was highly
recommended. According to [18] grape rootstocks V.
champini and V. vinifera are considered to be tolerant to

Journal of Agricultural Engineering and Food Technology

p-ISSN: 2350-0085; e-ISSN: 2350-0263; Volume 3, Issue 3; July-September, 2016
Role of Rootstocks in Fruit Production–A Review 185

salinity. [39] studied different grape rootstocks for certain 44-53

Moder Moder Suscept Loam/G Moder
High 10%
level of salinity (0.4 or 2.3 dS/m) and concluded that grape cv. ate ate/ ible ood ate
Shiraz grafted on ‘Ramsey’,‘1103 Paulsen’ and ‘140 Ru’ had Malegu
High Fertility
higher wine K+, pH and color hue rather than grafted on its e
own seedling. Same researchers also noted that grape cv. Modera Heavy Very
101-14 Low/ High Low/ High 9%
te Clay Low
‘Sultana’ grows vigorously when grafted on ‘Ramsey’,
Millard Moder Moder
‘1103P’ and ‘R2’, rootstocks. On the basis of nature of et Et ate ate
tolerance to different salt concentrations (0, 50, 85, 120, 155 De
mM NaCI), [37] categorized different rootstocks as a sensitive Grasset
(41 B, R. Lot, 110 R, 140 R and 161-49), moderately tolerant Swarz Deep/Fe
(13-5 and Ramsey) and tolerant (196-17, CH-1, CH-2 and Low/ High Some Low/ 6-9%
mann rtile
Superior). [10] suggested that hybrids (‘110R’, ‘140Ru’ and Moder Moder
‘1103P’) from rootstocks V. berlandieri x V. rupestris can be ate ate
used in drought prone areas where water is a limiting factor 41B
Suscept Dry Very
for grapevine productivity and he also noted that drought Millard Low Low/ Low 40%
ible Lime Low
resistance classification of rootstocks might vary from country et
Et De Moder
to country. Similarly [17] suggested that hybrids of V.
Grasset ate
berlandieri x V. riparia were more tolerant to drought.
Moder Modera Deep/Fe Mode
420A Low Low 20% Low
There have been only a few studies related to rootstock effects ate te rtile rate
on scion to cold hardiness. [20] found differences of cane and Millard
bud hardiness of rootstock ‘K5BB’, ‘3309C’ and ‘SO4’. et Et
Rootstock ‘3309C’ had the most cold hardy canes and buds; De
Grasset
its acclimation in fall was faster and declamation in spring was
Oppenh Moder Modera
slower than ‘K5BB’ and ‘SO4’. [35] found that the rootstock High Clay Low High 18% Low
eim ate te
did not affect the distribution of hardy canes within the #4
canopy; ‘Seyval’ grafted on ‘3309C’ appeared to be the cold 5BB Moder Modera Very
hardy. High Clay Low High 20%
Kober ate te Low
Table : Characteristics of different grape 5C Moder Modera
High Clay Low High 20%
rootstocks [11; 26 and 40]. Teleki ate te
High
1103 Modera Clay, Moder
Resista High High High High 18%
Paulsen te Lime ate
nce
Mediu
M. RS-3 Low High Sandy Low-
Phyllo Droug Active m
incogni Soil Salt
xera ht Lime Mediu
ta
m
(Root- Prefere Tolera Wet Tolera Tolera Mediu Mediu
Rootst Vigor Resista RS-9 High Low-
Knot) nce nce Feet nce nce m m
ock nce
Mediu
Riparia Modera Deep/Fe Low
Low/ High Low High m
Gloire te rtile <6%
Kingfis
Moder High High
her
ate
Moder Very Very Moder Tolera
Saint Very Suscept Moder GRN-1 Low Low
High Deep, High Low 14% ate/ High High ate nt
George High ible ate
but High
Toleran Uniform Very Very Moder Mode Moder Moder
t GRN-2 Low/
High High ate rate ate ate?
Loam Moder
1616 ate
Moder Modera Deep/Fe Moder
Couder Low High 11% Moder Very Very Moder Mode Moder Moder
ate/ te rtile ate/ GRN-3
c ate+ High High ate/ rate ate/ ate/
High High High High High?
3309 Moder Very Very Mode Moder Moder
Moder Suscept Deep GRN-4 High
Couder High Low High 11% Low/ ate/ High High rate ate/ ate/
ate/ ible Well-
c High High High?
Moder
High Drained
ate

Journal of Agricultural Engineering and Food Technology

p-ISSN: 2350-0085; e-ISSN: 2350-0263; Volume 3, Issue 3; July-September, 2016
186 P. K. Nimbolkar, Chandrakant Awachare, Y.T.N Reddy, Subhash Chander and Firoz Hussain

Role of Rootstocks in Guava Role of Rootstocks in Pear

At present, guava is propagated on seedlings raised from open Fewer rootstocks choices are available for pears than for
pollinated seeds and not on uniform clonal rootstocks. [9] apples. Domestic pear seedlings (Pyrus communis) are still the
reported that P. cattleianum, P. guinesee, P. molle and most acceptable rootstocks for pear cultivars in terms of
Philippine guava were found suitable as rootstocks. On P. vigour, hardiness, and compatibility. However, all pear trees
cattleianum, the trees were the tallest and gave the maximum on seedling roots are susceptible to fire blight. Seedlings of
yield. P. pumilum rootstock had dwarfing effect but fruits on Pyrus calleryana are adapted to many soil conditions and
this rootstock had maximum number of seeds, highest TSS produce semi-vigorous growth. It is resistant to fire blight, but
and total sugars. Trees on P. cujavillis produced the largest it’s not sufficiently winter hardy. Pyrus betulaefolia seedlings
fruits with the highest ascorbic acid content, though they were are also adapted for many soil conditions and it’s a winter
rough-skinned and not uniform. All rootstocks were free from hardy. The trees are vigorous, larger than ‘Bartlett seedling’,
wilt disease (Fusarium solani /Macrophomina phaseoli) and moderately tolerant to fire blight. Pyrus ussurensis can be
except ‘Allahabad Safeda’ [36]. [31] recorded that rootstock used as resistant to fire blight, pear psylla, and cold hardy.
aneuploid No. 82 impart dwarfness to ‘Allahabad Safeda’ in
Role of rootstocks in stone fruits
terms of plant height, plant spread and tree volume. They also
recorded higher yield on this rootstock. In India, the stone fruits like peach, plum, apricot and almond
Role of Rootstocks in Apple are generally propagated on their own seedling, while the
cherry plants are raised on ‘Paja’ (Prunus cerasoides)
There is a great diversity in the type of material used for seedlings. Commonly ‘Behmi (P. mira)’ is widely used as a
raising rootstock seedlings in apple. In Kashmir, wild rootstock for almond [4]. The relative contribution of organic
indigenous ‘Crab apple’ known as ‘Trel’ is used, in Himachal and inorganic solutes to osmotic adjustment in three almond
Pradesh, seedlings of ‘Crab C’ are employed as rootstock [22]. rootstocks subjected to soil salinity showed that leaf water
The first rootstock trial of apple was initiated in 1937 at and osmotic potentials were affected by salinity in GF677 and
Chaubattia with ‘Red Delicious’, ‘Jonathan’ and ‘Rymer’ Bitter almond, but less so in GN15, suggesting a higher
cultivars using Crab C, M 2, M 13, Merton 779, Merton 793 selectivity for K+ and Ca2+against Na+ in this latter rootstock.
and ‘Local Selection’ (seedling selection from ‘Ribbistin Peach seedlings itself use as a rootstocks for peach plantation
Pippin’) rootstocks. After the introduction of M and MM and plum, apricot, almond seedlings also used [7;33]. Peach
series of rootstocks during early sixties, from East Malling seedlings generally shows susceptibility to nematode but
Research Station, England, at Mashobra and Kotkhai in HP, ‘Nemaguard’ and ‘Okinawa’ showed tolerance to nematode
Chaubattia in UP and Shalimar in J & K, elaborate varietal- attack [13]. Some nurseries also use ‘Behmi’ (P. mira) as
cum-rootstock trials were initiated at Mashobra in 1967, rootstock for peach. Apricot can be used as resistant rootstock
Kotkhai in 1968, Chaubattia in 1969 and several locations in J against root knot nematode. Western sand cherry, Almond,
& K in 1969. As a result, some promising rootstocks were Nanking cherry are dwarfing rootstock for peach. For Plum
identified for different apple growing regions in India viz. M (P. domestica) selections like ‘Brompton’ and ‘Common
7, M 9, M 26, MM 106 and MM 111 for Himachal Pradesh; M plum’ from; St. Julien, ‘Common Mussel’ and ‘Damson’ from
2, M 4, M 7, M 9 for J&K and Merton 779, MM 106, M 13 for P. institia; Myrobalan from P. cerasifera; peach (P. persica),
Uttarakhand [2]. At Chaubattia, [23] observed that M 2 apricot (P. armeniaca), almond (P. amygdalus) and some
rootstock response to prolific bearing and high yield in ‘Red hybrids like Marianna plum (P. cerasifera × P. munsoniana)
Delicious’, ‘Jonathan’ and ‘Rymer’ at earlier stages (5th and are used as rootstocksin other countries. In India, peach,
10th years). Subsequently, the trend changed later years (20th apricot, behmi (natural hybrid of almond and wild peach) and
and 25th years) which recorded maximum yields in ‘Merton plum seedlings are commonly used as rootstocks [33]. The
779’ and ‘Crab C’ rootstocks whereas Merton 779 and M 13 main cherry rootstocks in other countries are Hazard (P.
rootstocks produced higher yields than other rootstocks after valium) and Mahler (P. mahaleb) seedlings, while Stockton
35th year. Similarly, [30] observed that apple trees grafted on Morello (P. cerasus) is also occasionally used. In India, the
MM 106 rootstock had significantly higher fruit set, yield and most common rootstock in Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and
yield efficiency than those on M 7. [5] observed that ‘Starking Kumaon Hills of UP is ‘Paja’ (P. cerasoides) [32], though old
Delicious’ on MM 111, MM 106, MM 104 and M 4 rootstocks plantations are invariably on Mazzard or Mahaleb rootstocks
showed less reduction in growth, photosynthetic efficiency [33]. For exceptional hardiness the seedlings of ‘Russian sour
and nutrient uptake, and had higher stomatal resistance, lower cherries’ could be used for Prunus besseyi [33].
transpiration rate, more accumulation of proline, ABA and
carbohydrate under water stress (10 bar) and these rootstocks 5. CONCLUSION
were thus considered more drought tolerant than M 2, M 7, M
9, M 25, M 26 and MM 109. The effect of rootstocks and inter-stocks pertaining to growth,
flowering, fruit set, yield efficiency and fruit quality attributes
of fruit crops are complex and poorly understood. Studies on

Journal of Agricultural Engineering and Food Technology

p-ISSN: 2350-0085; e-ISSN: 2350-0263; Volume 3, Issue 3; July-September, 2016
Role of Rootstocks in Fruit Production–A Review 187

understanding the mechanisms underlying these effects would [16] Jauhari, O. S., Teaotia, S. S. and Upadhyay, S. K. Acta Horti.,
help for future rootstock breeding and selection. A better 1972, 24: pp.107-109.
understanding of endogenous growth substances, rootstock- [17] Kocsis, L., Granett, J., Walker, M. A., Lin, H., Omer, A. D.
scion interactions, soil or climatic factors needed to be studied, Grape phylloxera populations adapted to Vitis berlandieri x V.
which would aid more efficient selection and use of rootstocks riparia rootstocks. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 1999, 50: pp. 101-106.
in the future. There is an urgent need to evolve rootstocks [18] Leon, B., Ehlig, C. F. and Clark, R. A. Effects of grape
tolerant to biotic and abiotic stresses in different tropical, sub- rootstocks on chloride accumulation in leaves. J. Amer. Soc.
Hort. Sci., 1969, 94: pp. 584-590.
tropical and temperate fruit crops.
[19] Mahabir Singh and Kanpure, R. N. Performance of mango cv.
REFERENCES Langra on different rootstock. Intl. J. Agric. Sci., 2(2): 2006, pp.
564-565.
[1] Abirami, K. Singh, R. Baskaran, V. Studies on the influence of [20] Miller, D. P., Howell, G. S. and Striegler, R. K. Cane and bud
seedling physiological parameters with vigour in some hardiness of own-rooted White Riesling and scions of White
polyembryonic and monoembryonic mango genotypes. Indian. Riesling and Chardonnay grafted to selected rootstocks. Amer. J.
J. Hortic, 2011, 68: pp. 18-23. Enol. Viticult. 1988, 39: pp. 60-66.
[2] Ananda, S. S. Rootstocks of stone fruits. Advances in [21] Murti, G. S. R., Upreti, K. K. Endogenous hormones and
Horticulture: Fruit Crops. Malhotra Publishing House, New phenols in rootstock seedlings of mango cultivars and their
Delhi, India, 1993. relationship with seedling vigour. Eur. J. Hortic. Sci, 2003, 68:
[3] Chadha, K. L. and Singh, H. P. Citriculture scenario of pp. 2-7.
India. in Citriculture in North-western India: Proceedings of [22] Nauriyal, J. P. Apple in Punjab. Farm Bulletin No. 10. Punjab
Citrus Show-cum-Seminar. Prospects and Problems of Kinnow agricultural University, Ludhiana, 1965.
Cultivation (K.S. Gill, J.S. Kanwar and R. Singh, eds.). Punjab [23] Om, H. and Pathak, R. K. Influences of rootstocks on the growth
Agricultural University, Ludhiana. 1990, pp. 21-64 and productivity of some apple cultivars. J. Ind. Hort., 1983,
[4] Chadha, T. R. and Karkara, B. K.. Morphological and 40(4): pp.168-172.
anatomical characteristics of some indigenous Prunus species [24] Palaniappan, 2001. Germplasm screening for salinity stress in
and their horticultural significance. In: Fruit Breeding in India tropical fruit species. Regional Training Course
(Nijjar, G. S., Ed.). Oxford and IBH Publishing Co., New Delhi, “Characterization, Evaluation and Conservation of Tropical
1977, pp. 122-129. Fruits Genetic Resources”, organized by IPGRI, ICAR and
[5] Chandal, J. S. and Chauhan, J. S. Drought Resistant of Starking IIHR.
Delicious apple plants on different Rootstocks. J. Ind. Hort., [25] Patil, V. K. 1987. High density planting and dwarfing rootstocks
1992, 49(4): pp. 294-299. in citrus. A review. J. Maharashtra Agric. Univ. 12: pp. 189-94.
[6] Chandan, P. M., Kadam, J. H. and Ambad, S. N. Effect of [26] Pongracz, D. P. 1983. Rootstocks for grapevines. David Philip,
different polyembryonic and monoembryonic rootstocks on Cape Town.
performance of Dashehari mango. Inst. J. Agril. Sci., 2006, [27] Quijada, O., Castellano, G., Jiménez , N. and Briceño,
2(2):pp. 594-595. E. Development and productivity of mango cultivars grafted
[7] Dewan, S. D. Peach cultivation in Punjab. Hort. J. 1962, pp. 96- over sinamaica rootstcks in the plain of Maracaibo. Agronomía
102. Trop. 2008, 58(3), pp. 207-213.
[8] Dubey, A. K., Srivastav, M., Sharma, Y. K, Pandey, R. N., [28] Reddy, Y. T. N., Reju, M., Kurian, P. R., Ramachander, Gorakh
Deshmukh, P. S. Dry mass production and distribution of Singh and Kohli, R. R. Long term effects of rootstocks on
nutrients in two mango rootstocks as affected by salinity. Indian. growth, fruit yielding patterns of Alphonso mango (M. Indica)
J. Hortic. 2007, 64: pp. 385-390. Scientia Hort., 2003, 97(2): pp. 95-108.
[9] Edwar, J. C. and Shankar, G. Rootstock trial for guava. [29] Rom, R. C., Carlson, R. F. Rootstocks for fruit crops. New York,
Allahabad farmer, 1964, 38:249-50. Wiley and Sons. 1987, p. 494.
[10] Ezzahouani, A. and Williams, L. E. Influence of rootstock on [30] Sharma, D. D. and Chauhan, J. S. Effect of different rootstocks
leaf water potential, yield, and berry composition of Ruby and training system on growth and cropping of ‘Delicious
Seedless grapevines. Amer. J. Enol. Viticult. 1995, 46:559-563. apples. Ind. J. Hort., 1990, 74(4): pp. 365-70.
[11] Galet, P. and Morton, L. A practical ampelography; Grapevine [31] Sharma, Y. K., Goswami, A. M. and Sharma, R. R. Effect of
identification. Cornell Univ. Press, Ithaca, NY., 1979, pp. 248. dwarfing aneuploid guava rootstock in high density orcharding.
[12] Gazit, S. and Kadman, A. 13-1 mango rootstock selection. Indian J. Hort., 1992, 49: 31-36.
Journal of Horticultural Science, 1980, 15(5): pp. 669. [32] Srivastava, D. N. and Gustav, E. F. Propagation of temperate
[13] Hansen, C. J., Lownsbery, B. F. and Hesse, C. O. Nematode fruit plants in Kumaon hills. In fruit Nursery Practices in India.
resistance in peaches. California Agric. 1956, 10(9): pp. 5-11. Directorate of Extension, Ministry of Food and Agriculture,
[14] Higgs, K. H. and Jones, H. G. Water relations and cropping of New Delhi, 1962, pp. 14-18.
apple cultivars on a dwarfing rootstock in response to imposed [33] Singh, R. N. and Guptha, P. N. Rootstock problem in stone fruits
drought. Journal of horticultural science, 1991, 66: 367-379. and potentialities of wild species found in India. Punjab Hort. J.
[15] Himelrick, D. G. Growth and nutritional responses of nine grape 1971, 11: pp. 157-175.
cultivars to low soil pH. Hort. Sci. 1991, 26: pp. 269-271. [34] Smith, M. W., Bright, J. D., Hoult, M. D., Renfree, R. A.
Maddenrn, T. and Coombes, N. Field evaluation of 64 rootstocks

Journal of Agricultural Engineering and Food Technology

p-ISSN: 2350-0085; e-ISSN: 2350-0263; Volume 3, Issue 3; July-September, 2016
188 P. K. Nimbolkar, Chandrakant Awachare, Y.T.N Reddy, Subhash Chander and Firoz Hussain

for growth and yield of ‘Kensington Pride’ mango. Hort.

Science, 2008, 43: pp. 1720-1725.
[35] Striegler, R. K. and Howell, G. S. The influence of rootstock on
the cold hardiness of Seyval grapevines I. Primary and
secondary effects on growth, canopy development, yield, fruit
quality and cold hardiness. Vitis. 1991, 30: pp. 1-10.
[36] Teaotia, S. S. and Pandey, I. C. 1961. Effect of growth
substances on the rooting of guava stem cutting. Sic. Cult. 27:
pp. 442-44.
[37] Troncoso, A., Matte, C., Cantos, M. and Lavee. S. Evaluation of
salt tolerance of in vitro grown grapevine rootstock varieties.
Vitis. 1999, 38 (2): pp. 55-60.
[38] Varu, D. K. and Barad, A.V. Standardization of mango rootstock
for mitigating salt stress. Indian J. Hort., 2010, pp. 67: 79-83.
[39] Walker, R.R., Read, P.E. and Blackmore, D.H. Rootstock and
salinity effects on rates of berry maturation, ion accumulation
and colour development in Shiraz grapes. Austral. J. Grape and
Wine Res. 2000, 6: pp. 227-239.
[40] Wolpert, J. Selections of rootstocks; implications for quality. In:
Grapevine Rootstocks; Current use, Research and Application.
Proceedings of the 2005 Rootstock Symposium. Pub by MVEC.
2005, pp. 25-33.
[41] Zuazo Durán, V. H., Martínez-Raya, A., Aguilar Ruiz , A. and
Franco Tarifa, D. Impact of salinity on macro- and micronutrient
uptake in mango (Mangifera indica L. cv. Osteen) with different
rootstocks. 2004.

Journal of Agricultural Engineering and Food Technology

p-ISSN: 2350-0085; e-ISSN: 2350-0263; Volume 3, Issue 3; July-September, 2016

View publication stats