Next Article in Journal
Biology of Blattodea and Dermaptera in the Continental Biogeographical Region and Adjacent Areas of European Russia
Next Article in Special Issue
Analysis of the Variability of the Textile Properties of Brown Cotton Preserved in the Native Communities of the Amazon of the Province of La Convención—Cusco
Previous Article in Journal
The Aging of Urban Gardens Can Enhance Their Role as Refuges for Local Ant Species
Previous Article in Special Issue
Invasive Characteristics of Robinia pseudoacacia and Its Impacts on Species Diversity
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 17
Issue 1
10.3390/d17010065
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Evaluation of Diversity of Newly Bred Czech Sweet Cherry Cultivars in Extensive Plantations

by
Jiří Sedlák
*,
Boris Krška
,
Liliia Pavliuk
,
Jana Čmejlová
,
František Paprštein
and
Jitka Blažková
Research and Breeding Institute of Pomology Holovousy Ltd., 508 01 Hořice, Czech Republic
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2025, 17(1), 65; https://doi.org/10.3390/d17010065
Submission received: 17 November 2024 / Revised: 10 January 2025 / Accepted: 17 January 2025 / Published: 18 January 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Plant Diversity Hotspots in the 2020s)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) is an economically important and profitable stone fruit species grown in the temperate and subtropical climates, bearing fruits with unique flavour and nutritional benefits. There is also a long tradition of sweet cherry breeding in the Czech Republic. We report here the evaluation of economically important fruit and vegetative characters in 27 sweet cherry cultivars grown in the Research and Breeding Institute of Pomology (RBIP) in the genebank plantation. The cultivars were evaluated phenotypically using standard descriptors for sweet cherries. Established cultivars ‘Burlat’ (early ripening) and ‘Kordia’ (late ripening) were included in the study as commercial standards. The cultivar ‘Früheste der Mark’ was used as the earliest cultivar of the sweet cherry season. The results presented in this study demonstrate the high diversity of the analyzed sweet cherry germplasm. The cultivars ‘Horka’, ‘Justyna’, and ‘Sandra’ stood out in terms of fruit size and taste quality. The evaluated newly bred Czech sweet cherry cultivars are broadly described at the end of the presented paper.

1. Introduction

Sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) is a diploid mostly self-sterile tree species in the Rosaceae family, with a genome of 2n = 16 that was sequenced for the first time by Shirasawa et al. (2017) [1]. In the temperate and subtropical climates, this species represents an important vegetatively propagated perennial crop with a high degree of heterozygosity and long ancient breeding history. Since the nineteenth century, sweet cherries have been one of the most popular garden fruits that have been mainly used for fresh consumption, or traditionally for pies, canning, preserves, and distillate production. Moreover, in Central European climatic conditions, early ripening sweet cherries are historically the first fresh fruits of the season with high economic value, unique flavour, and nutritional benefits, as they contain high levels of phenolics, flavonoids, and other antioxidants [2]. Not only due to its sweet taste, the global consumer demand for sweet cherries has recently increased. However, the fruit is highly perishable with a limited shelf life of 7–10 days [3]; so, new sweet cherry varieties with different characteristics are bred to increase its diversity and usability, and the main scope of breeding is the prolongation of fruit availability on the market.
Unsurprisingly, sweet cherry intraspecific diversity has been historically influenced by targeted human selection with the aim of obtaining higher consumer values, indicating a particular preference for genotypes with bigger and firmer fruits. However, the impacts of climate change are already reducing crop production on a global scale, and several surveys indicate that cherry breeding programmes around the world face a significant challenge to develop cultivars adapted to changing environmental conditions [4,5,6]. A diversified portfolio of different sweet cherry cultivars and landraces can help to mitigate climate risks by enabling fruit growers to select appropriate genotypes for their local conditions and also ensure food production in the context of global change [6]. Currently, thousands of sweet cherry varieties exist, possessing very different phenotypic characteristics, such as fruit colour, shape, size, or firmness. Their diversity is characterized by two approaches—from a genetic point of view and from its phenotype manifestation. Genetic diversity is usually examined from two different perspectives. The first one is genotyping for the purpose of identifying varieties, searching for clones or relationships in pedigrees. SSR markers are usually used for this analysis [6,7,8,9]. The second area of genetic diversity research is an identification of molecular markers associated with agronomically important traits for their use in the molecular marker-assisted selection of promising seedlings for the given trait. Several studies using whole-genome sequences have recently appeared, which identified very interesting markers from a breeding point of view [10,11,12]. Studies dealing with phenotype diversity are scarcer; however, they are no less interesting. For example, they are important for the selection of the best variety for local conditions, the selection of the best pollinating partner for intended variety, the sequential harvest of different varieties on the same farm, and so on. To provide some examples, Ganopoulos et al. 2015 [13] described the diversity of morpho-physiological traits in worldwide sweet cherry cultivars of the genebank collection, and Rakonjac et al. (2014) [14] and Stankovic Nedjic et al. (2023) [15] analyzed phenotypic diversity in wild cherries. Devasirvatham et al. (2022) [16] reviewed the key determinants of the physiological and fruit quality traits and described their importance in cherry breeding programmes. Finally, some of the studies combine genetic and phenotypic approaches, such as Avramidou et al. (2021) [17], who conducted a genetic and an epigenetic study accompanied by a correlation analysis of phenotypic traits.
The cultivation of sweet cherries is an established tradition in Central Europe, and many landraces originate from this region. Also, in different regions of the Czech Republic, many landraces, such as ‘Chlumecká’, ‘Hořická Pumra’, ‘Libějovická raná’, ‘Těchlovická’, ‘Sychrovská chrupka’, and ‘Vítovka molitorovská’, have been developed, originating from the Middle Ages. Through this process, which took place spontaneously over the ages, local sweet cherry varieties have formed a substantial and integral part of agricultural biodiversity. Modern sweet cherry breeding continued in the long tradition of the selection and cultivation of this fruit crop in the Czech Republic. The breeding programme began in 1973 and continues up to the present [18]. Initially, the programme focused mainly on obtaining profitable cultivars suitable for mechanized harvesting and the processing industry. Later, it also focused on the resistance of flowers to late-spring frost and fruits to cracking. Other objectives were to improve fruit quality, especially size, firmness, and taste, followed by very early or very late ripening to satisfy consumers throughout the sweet cherry season. The result of this breeding process is the currently diversified portfolio of 24 Czech varieties developed in Research and Breeding Institute of Pomology (RBIP) Holovousy, which are evaluated and compared with commercial standards in this article. An evaluation was carried out in extensive cultivation conditions of higher-trunk forms of trees on strongly growing rootstocks with a grassy centre inter-row. Globally, there is a growing interest in such extensive growing systems to increase biodiversity of landscape, also due to the environmental and anti-erosion function of fruit plantings as permanent crops. This article presents original research, because until now, newly bred cherry varieties have been phenotypically evaluated mainly in commercial dense plantings under the widespread use of chemical pesticides, high doses of chemical fertilizers, and the extensive pumping of groundwater into drip irrigation systems.

2. Materials and Methods

The evaluation of economically important fruit and vegetative characters of 27 sweet cherry accessions was carried out in an extensive genebank plantation of RBIP in five consecutive years from 2016 to 2020. Among them, 24 cultivars were newly bred in RBIP. The widely cultivated ‘Burlat’ (early ripening) and ‘Kordia’ (late ripening) were included in the study for comparison as established commercial standards. The cultivar ‘Früheste der Mark’ was included as the earliest cultivar of the sweet cherry season. From the beginning of the ripening of this variety, the cherry weeks in the given vegetation year are counted gradually.
The evaluated sweet cherry cultivars were planted in the RBIP genebank, which was established in 1989 as part of the fruit germplasm collections in the eastern Bohemia village of Holovousy. This locality (coordinates: 50°22′31″ N 15°34′39″ E) is situated in the Jičín district in the Hradec Králové region of the Czech Republic. It has an average annual temperature of 8.4 °C and precipitation of 663.5 mm [2]. The collection, consisting of three plants representing each cultivar, was planted at an altitude of 320 m with a planting distance of 6.0 × 6.0 m on vigorous mazzard seedling as a rootstock. The trees were trained to a central leader with well-established scaffold branches. Annual sanitary pruning was performed in April and May to develop and maintain tree size and shape. Dead, broken, or diseased branches were pruned back to live wood. The strips under tree crowns were maintained weed-free with herbicide applications. The centre row between the trees was maintained with regularly mowed grass to prevent erosion and to allow the movement of agricultural mechanization for agrotechnical interventions and plantation management. The plantation was not irrigated. Standard pest control and nutrient management were followed. Monitoring was carried out over a five-year period from 2016 to 2020. Cultivars were phenotypically evaluated using standardized descriptors for sweet cherry developed in RBIP for genebank evaluation [19].
The beginning of flowering, end of flowering, and time of ripening are counted in days from the beginning of the calendar year. The time of ripening (sweet cherry weeks) is counted in weeks after the maturity of the earliest cultivar ‘Früheste der Mark’ (synonym ‘Speyer May Cherry’), which usually ripens in the first week of June in the Czech Republic (week 0).
For the evaluation of fruit traits, 100 fruits were used as a mixed sample from three trees in the germplasm collection. Fruit weight (g) was calculated as the mean of the weight of 100 cherry fruits. Other characteristics, including flower set, fruit set, colour of fruit, colouring ability of juice, juiciness, texture, taste, flavour, separability of stone from flesh, separability of stem from fruit, and resistance of fruit to cracking were evaluated subjectively and scored on a 9-point classification scale, with 9 representing the highest level of the character. Concretely, the flower set was defined as follows: 1 absent, 3 weak, 5 intermediate, 7 high, 9 very high; fruit set: 1 absent, 3 weak, 5 intermediate, 7 high, 9 very high; fruit colour: 1 yellow, 3 yellow with face (marble), 5 red, 7 dark red, 9 black; colouring ability of juice: 1 absent, 3, weak, 5 intermediate, 7 high, 9 very high; juiciness: 3 low (dry); 5 moderately juicy; 7 highly juicy. The values for texture had the following meanings: 1 fibrous, 5 intermediate, 9 very fine; taste: 1 extremely poor, 3 poor, 5 fair, 7 good, 9 excellent; flavour: 1 absent, 3 slight, 5 intermediate, 7 strong, 9 very strong; separability of stone from flesh: 1 very clingy stone, 3 slightly clingy stone, 5 intermediate, 7 partly free stone, 9 free stone; separability of stem from fruit: 1 very bad, 3 bad, 5 intermediate; 7 good, 9 very good; resistance to cracking: 1 very sensitive, 3 sensitive, 5 intermediate, 7 resistant, 9 no crack. The resistance of the fruit to cracking was evaluated only in 2016 and 2017, when meteorological conditions and sufficient rainfall allowed for this evaluation.
Excel software was used to statistically process the evaluated traits. All values were averaged to obtain means for individual characteristics and standard deviation (SD) was calculated to describe the variance of the evaluated values. SD was computed from the following formula:
  SD = ∑ x i − x ¯ 2 n − 1
where x i takes on each value in the set, x ¯ is the statistical mean of the set of values, and n is the number of values. The coefficient of variation was calculated from the formula:
CV = SD x ¯
and the standard error of the mean (SE) from the formula:
SE = SD n
To find a suitable pollinating cultivar for each genotype, S-alleles were determined using one-reaction PCR protocol and fragment analysis, described in detail in the study by Cmejlova et al., 2023 [3]. DNA was extracted from phloem using an ExgeneTM Plant SV DNA isolation kit (GeneAll Biotechnology, Seoul, Korea). Shortly, the set of 27 primers described in [3] was used for PCR reaction under the following conditions: 2 μL DNA (10 ng/μL); 5 μL Phusion Flash High-Fidelity PCR Master Mix (ThermoFisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA), primers at concentrations dedicated in Table 1 in [13], with PCR water up to 10 μL. PCR amplification was run on a C1000 PCR cycler (Bio-Rad) with the following parameters: 98 °C/30 s; 23× (98 °C/10 s, 60 °C/10 s, 72 °C/30 s); 72 °C/15 s. The PCR product (1 μL) was added to 15 μL Hi-Di Formamide and 0.5 μL GeneScanTM 600 LIZTM,dye size standard (both ThermoFisher Scientific). Fragment analysis was carried out on an AB3500 genetic analyzer (ThermoFisher Scientific) after 2 min denaturation at 95 °C, and results were evaluated with GeneMapper software, version 5.0 (ThermoFisher Scientific). Pollinating partners were selected as cultivars not differing in a peak of flowering by more than 2 days on average. The peak of flowering was determined as the average of the beginning and end of flowering in a given year. Pollinating partners could share one identical S-allele.

3. Results and Discussion

The results of the evaluation of all characters of sweet cherry cultivars are shown in Table 1 for vegetative characters, and the pomological traits of fruits are depicted in Table 2a,b. Mean ± SD, CV% and SE are shown for all features. In the following paragraphs, the biodiversity of evaluated cultivars is described for individual traits and discussed in view of breeding intentions.
The length of the flowering onset period for all sweet cherries is highly dependent on weather conditions in a particular vegetation season and usually lasts about two weeks in Holovousy, as described in detail in Holušová et al., 2024 [12]. The difference in the beginning of flowering between the earliest and the latest flowering cultivars was approximately 13 days based on average data. The cultivars ‘Adélka’ and ‘Früheste der Mark’ flowered very early, approximately on the 102nd–103rd day (12–13 April) from the beginning of the calendar year. Delayed beginning of flowering was observed for ‘Christiana’ (day 115, 25 April, again on average). Most of the described cultivars began blooming between day 107 and 110 (17–20 April). The start of flowering is a very important trait in many regions because of the possible risk of damage to flowers by late-spring frosts. For example, based on historical data from the Czech Republic (1924–2011), the sweet cherry blooming period usually takes 10–13 days with average incidence of temperature below −1.1 °C 0.6 day/year at the same period [20]. In this respect, beginning of flowering as late as possible is a desired vegetative trait to obtain sufficiently high harvests for the grower. This is also particularly important in conditions of global climate change and climatic seasons, in which low spring temperatures following high temperatures in late winter and early spring cause significant economic losses. The frost resistance of sweet cherry flower buds and flowers is a complex phenomenon, but in general, the flower bud damage of cultivars depends mainly on their stage of development, with the age of the trees and canopy size also affecting the frost damage [21,22]. In the overall context, the rootstock, with its influence on the timing of the onset of growth in spring, may also contribute to frost resistance in the case of grafted trees [23,24]. Regarding the end of flowering, the ‘Früheste der Mark’ variety finished flowering first, 111 days after the beginning of the calendar year, while the ‘Jacinta’ variety finished flowering the latest, at 124.8 days. As with the beginning of flowering, the latest possible end of flowering is crucial for cherry fruiting in a year with a late-spring frost.
As sweet cherry is primarily a self-incompatible plant, it is necessary to also co-plant a suitable pollinating partner in an orchard to maximize fruit production [25]. As was recognized later, the self-incompatibility of sweet cherries is given by a multiallelic S-locus, bearing two genes as part of one non-recombinating haploblock–gene for S-RNase, responsible for the female (pistil) part of self-incompatibility and a gene-encoding S-haplotype specific F-box (SFB) protein, ensuring the male (pollen) part of self-incompatibility [26]. Briefly, SFB protein in cooperation with further helper proteins protects S-RNAse from the same locus against degradation and the enzyme thus exert its function—it degrades RNAs in the growing pollen tube, which leads to the arrest of its growth in the stigma [27]. Because sweet cherry is a diploid organism, it contains two different S-alleles in its genome. Two varieties bearing the same combinations of S-alleles therefore cannot be mutually fertilized, i.e., haploid pollen grain has to possess a different S-allele from both alleles of the pistil to be able to fertilize the ovum in the ovary. A very advantageous self-compatibility trait can be obtained by the S-allele inactivating mutations; however, only 94 self-compatible genotypes out of 1700 varieties with determined S-allele composition were described [28]. Moreover, some of them are not varieties suitable for commercial fruit production, so self-incompatible varieties clearly predominate in production orchards. However, self-incompatibility may have extensive negative consequences for commercial sweet cherry production, as growing two different variants in one orchard can lead to complications during harvest. Both variants may ripen at different times or bear fruits with significant differences in quality, size, shape, or colour, and cannot be mixed for consumers/processors. It is therefore desirable for the portfolio of available cherry varieties to have a specific type of diversity, where there will be pairs of cross-pollinating varieties blooming at the same time and showing similar fruit characteristics that are important for the consumer. In addition to the breeding of increasingly better varieties, in many cases it is also desirable to breed a phenotypically identical pollinating partner for an already existing high-quality variety. From the grower’s point of view, the most important diversity of sweet cherry varieties should be achieved in S-alleles to enlarge the portfolio of pollinating partners (high-quality self-compatible varieties are preferred) and also at the time of harvesting to prolong the cherry harvest season.
To find suitable pollination partners, two conditions have to be fulfilled simultaneously. Both varieties should be ideally in full bloom at the same time, and they have to differ by at least one S-allele. The S-alleles of here-described varieties were therefore determined (Table 3). Five of the twenty-four presented cultivars possess an S1S3 combination (‘Aranka’, ‘Helga’, ‘Justyna’, ‘Kasandra’, ‘Marta’) and an S1S6 combination (‘Adélka’, ‘Fabiola’, ‘Horka’, ‘Sylvana’, ‘Vanda’), respectively. On the other hand, a unique combination in this cherry collection was found in ‘Tamara’ (S1S9) and ‘Tim’ (S4S5). The only self-fertile cultivar was ‘Halka’, with S1S4’ S-alleles enabling an orchard monoculture of this cultivar.
The varieties described herein represent modern high-quality sweet cherries with potential for commercial production. Therefore, possible pollinating partners in this collection were identified. Very strict criterions (the average peak flowering of varieties does not differ by more than two days; minimally one different S-allele) were established, enabling the selection of pollination partners (Table 3). Most cultivars showed peak flowering at the same time, so only the criterion of at least one different S-allele was applied. The most suitable pollination partners for the first flowering ‘Adélka’ seem to be ‘Aranka’, ‘Irena’, and ‘Kasandra’. On the other hand, no variety met the strict parameters for choosing a pollination partner for the last flowering ‘Christiana’. The closest flowering variety capable of pollinating ‘Christiana’ was ‘Jacinta’, with an average flowering peak occurring about 2.5 days earlier. This means that the main blooming period of these two varieties may cease in some years, and it would be better to co-plant ‘Christiana’ with other commercially successful late-blooming varieties, for example, ‘Lambert’.
As for the harvest, ‘Früheste der Mark’ and ‘Adélka’ (1st sweet cherry week), ‘Aranka’ (2nd), ‘Burlat’ (2nd), ‘Helga’ (2nd), ‘Kasandra’ (2nd), and ‘Marta’ (2nd) were the earliest ripening sweet cherry cultivars in our observations. On the other hand, ‘Irena’ (6th sweet cherry week) was the last to ripen. The difference in the beginning of ripening between the earliest and latest cultivar was 41 days under the climatic conditions of Holovousy, where the majority of varieties usually ripen within six cherry weeks. Detailed information about the time of harvest in 235 genebank accessions can be found in Holušová et al. 2022 [10]. By using a wider portfolio of different cultivars with greater diversity, or by growing at different altitudes, farmers can extend the harvest window and avoid lower yields during the peak harvest period [29].
Fruit set was generally related to the flower set. The usually lower set of fruits compared to flowers is naturally due to the fact that not all flowers are properly pollinated and as a result do not develop fruit. In the five-year period evaluated, the cultivar ‘Vanda’ showed the highest level (6.2) of the fruit set. On the other hand, the lowest fruit set was achieved with the cultivar Christiana (1.5), which was not suitable for extensive growing conditions. High yield is a basic requirement for the economic profitability of cherry cultivars in commercial plantations [30,31]. In extensive fruit orchards and agroforestry ecosystems with strips of grass, large crowns of trees fulfil, in addition to yield, an environmental function for higher ecosystem stability and provide food and shelter for insects and birds [32,33]. Fruit set was the trait with the highest recorded variation (CV) in our observations. The reason for this could be unfavourable weather for pollinators during the flowering period of sweet cherries in years with low fruit set. The influence of adverse climatic conditions on the occurrence of pollinators has been noted in many species of cross-pollinated fruit crops [34,35,36].
It is genetically determined that sweet cherry fruit size can vary greatly. The cultivars ‘Sandra’ (10.4 g), ‘Justyna’ (9.9 g), ‘Horka’ (9.7 g), ‘Tamara’ (9.4 g), ‘Irena’ (9.2 g), ‘Early Korvik’ (9.1 g), and ‘Jacinta’ (9.1 g) had an average weight of 100 fruits above 9.0 g. On the other hand, the earliest ripening cultivars ‘Früheste der Mark’ (3.7 g) and ‘Adélka’ (5.5 g) had the smallest fruits. Fruit size is an important characteristic for commercial market value. Based on the various consumer surveys [22,37,38], it can be expected that consumers prefer larger fruit. Szilágyi et al. [39] found that sweet cherries weighing at least 10 g with a minimum diameter of 28 mm are preferred in the fresh fruit market. In our experiments, only cv. ‘Sandra’ produced fruits of a similar size. However, it has to be taken into account that the genebank plantation was not irrigated and that the listed cherry varieties with a fruit weight of more than 9 g kept such large fruits even on older trees around the thirtieth year of life. We expect that in modern more intensive plantings with younger trees, cherries would reach larger sizes under irrigation and fertigation. In the experiments of Lanauskas et al. [40] with commercial cherry cultivars, all tested sweet cherry cultivars also showed weights less than 10 g under conditions comparable to our experiment in non-irrigated planting. As with yield and harvest, fruit size may play a minor role in agroforestry and landscape concepts aimed at stabilizing the ecosystem of cultural landscapes and higher farmland biodiversity [33].
Most cultivars (24) had the dark red and almost black colour (≥7) of fruits in full ripeness, as is preferable for European consumers [41]. In contrast, the earliest cultivars ‘Früheste der Mark’, ‘Adélka’, and late-ripening ‘Irena’ had a less intense red colour of the fruits. It can be expected that the canning industry will prefer more colouring fruits in its products [42]. Also, a higher intensity of red colour is associated with a higher content of anthocyanins and higher health benefits due to higher antioxidant capacity [43,44].
The majority of cultivars (26) showed above-average juice colouration, with values ≥ 5. The lowest colouring ability of juice (4.7) was observed in the cultivar ‘Irena’. In the Czech Republic, sweet cherries are mostly consumed as fresh fruit and less as processed. However, in processing, the industry prefers dark red cultivars with higher flesh colouring ability. The juiciness of the cherries tested was considered to be above average. The cultivar ‘Fabiola’, ‘Kasandra’, and ‘Tim’ stood out in this parameter, with a value higher than 7.5. Good juiciness is an advantage in juice production and processing, and it is also preferred by consumers [45,46].
The cultivar ‘Kasandra’ received the highest score (7.0) for flesh texture. On the other hand, ‘Amid’ and ‘Early Korvik’ received the lowest rating (4.0) in the area of flesh texture. The texture of fruits may be related to their firmness; therefore, fruits with higher texture values are better perceived in the market chain, as they are not subject to such rapid deterioration [47].
According to the quality of taste, ‘Justyna’ (8.0), ‘Amid’ (7.8), ‘Jacinta’ (7.8), and ‘Vilma (7.8) were the best-scoring cultivars. On the other hand, the cultivar ‘Early Korvik’ showed in our evaluation only an average (5.0), but still acceptable taste. One of the most important taste characteristic is fruit sweetness, as the most preferable cherries are sweet, but the fruits should not have a very sweet taste [41]. All evaluated varieties achieved an above-average flavour score in a relatively close range of values (5.0–7.0). It has been previously described that aldehydes are among the predominate flavour contributors to the sweet cherries’ aroma [46,48]. Several studies involving consumers have shown that overall taste, aroma, sweetness, and flesh texture are important attributes in determining consumer preferences for sweet cherry.
The cultivars ‘Aranka’ (7.6) and ‘Helga’ (7.8) had the easiest separation of stone from flesh. On the contrary, the cultivar ‘Early Korvik’ had a very low separability (2.0) of stone from flesh. Most cultivars had an above-average ease of separation from the stem, the lowest values were found in ‘Christiana’ (5.0). The good separability of stem from fruit, together with the separability of stone from flesh, can be an advantage for the canning industry, especially in late-ripening cultivars.
‘Amid’, ‘Debora’, and ‘Těchlovan’ were highly resistant to fruit cracking (9.0); in the years evaluated, their fruits did not crack at all. In contrast, the cultivar ‘Irena’ received the lowest ratings in this respect (5.0). The cracking of fruits is undesirable, because it reduces production, and cracks are an entry point for fungal diseases. It is a very complex trait influenced by many causes; however, precipitation from May to July (during ripening of individual cultivars) seems to be very important [16,49,50,51]. In contrast to the warming trend at the climatologic station in Holovousy that is in accordance with the current climate changes [52], the long-term trend of lower precipitation is almost invisible [53], and therefore we cannot expect a reduction in cherry cracking as a direct relation to global warming.
In order to meet the needs of consumers in the fresh sweet cherry market, it is necessary to conduct tasting evaluations of fruit characteristics and consumer surveys. According to the results of surveys conducted by Paunović et al. [54] or Bujdosó (2020) [41], it was concluded that the most valuable indicators of cherry fruit quality are fruit taste, size and shape, absence of surface damage, and stem length. According to the observation data of Antognoni et al. [55], cultivars with large fruits are also more desirable on the market. The same opinion is shared by Szpadzik et al. [56], who stated that the main commercial popularity of the fruit is given by the size of the fruit. Firmness is another valuable characteristic of fruit in the fresh fruit market. This property is highly valued by marketers, consumers, and producers [57], as it can provide resistance to damage during transportation and the better storage of fruit [57].
The results of our observations confirm that the breeding programme of RBIP has succeeded in obtaining a large number of new sweet cherry cultivars that meet the above-mentioned requirements of the fruit market. Concurrently, a diversity of individual characteristics enables us choose the best cultivar for certain intentions, for example, early- or late-ripening ones to prolong the cherry harvest season, with an easiness of stone or stem separation for industrial processing, with a high fruit firmness to minimize damage during transport, etc. An evaluation of extensive plantation is important, especially for farmers with non-optimal growing conditions (i.e., non-irrigated orchards), gardeners, or for planting in the open landscape. Individual cultivars are described in a detail below.

3.1. Description of the Evaluated Cultivars Newly Bred in RBIP

3.1.1. Adélka

Very early, self-sterile sweet cherry (guigne). It originates from a cross between ‘Knauffs Schwarze’ and the Czech cultivar ‘Granát’. Trees are moderately vigorous to vigorous, and upright. The cultivar flowers very early. Fruits usually ripen in the first sweet cherry week. Fruits are cordate, flat in the pistil part. Fruit flesh is soft, red, slightly acid, and juicy. Fruit weight is usually 5–6 g. Fruits ripen one week before the commercial cultivar ‘Burlat’. Very early ripening and resistance to Monilia are the advantages of this cultivar. The poor formation of fruiting spurs is the main drawback.

3.1.2. Amid

Self-sterile bigarreu, a cross of ‘Kordia’ and ‘Vic’. The trees are moderately vigorous, and upright. The cultivar flowers quite early. Cultivar is moderately productive, and bears early. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are heart-shaped with a dark red skin colour. The flesh is moderately firm, dark red, sweet, and aromatic. Fruit weight usually averages between 7.5 and 9.0 g. Fruits ripen 3 days before ‘Kordia’. Resistance of fruits to cracking and to Monilia are advantages of this cultivar. High productivity is also an advantage for growers. Moderate susceptibility of flowers to frost is a disadvantage.

3.1.3. Aranka

Early, self-sterile sweet cherry (guigne). It is the result of crossing ‘Early Rivers’ and ‘Moreau’. Trees are moderately vigorous, broadly rounded. The cultivar flowers early and is moderately productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the second sweet cherry week. Fruits are widely rounded with a dark red skin. Fruit flesh is moderately firm, similar to ‘Burlat’, slightly acidic, and juicy. Fruit weight is usually 6.0–7.0 g. Fruits ripen just after ‘Burlat’. Resistance to cracking and firm fruit are the advantages of this cultivar. A disadvantage is that the size of the fruit is only average size.

3.1.4. Debora

Self-sterile cultivar derived from the crossing of ‘Kordia’ and ‘Merton’. Trees are moderately vigorous, semi-erect. The cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are moderately productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fourth sweet cherry week. The fruit is round with a dark red skin. The flesh is moderately firm, sweet, and very juicy. The fruit weight is on 7.0–8.0 g on average. Fruits ripen two weeks after ‘Burlat’. High productivity and resistance to fruit cracking are advantages of this cultivar. The main disadvantage is the moderate resistance of flowers to late-spring frost.

3.1.5. Early Korvik

Self-sterile bigarreu, which originates from the chemotherapy of the cultivar ‘Korvik’ as the mutation with earlier ripening. Trees are moderately vigorous, upright. The cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are productive, and bear very early. Fruits usually ripen in the fourth sweet cherry week. Fruits are cordate with dark brown-red skin. The flesh is firm, dark red, acidic–sweet, and drier. Fruit weight is usually between 9.0 and 9.5 g. It ripens a little more than a week before ‘Kordia’. Large fruits, moderate resistance to cracking, productivity, and resistance to late-spring frosts are the main advantages of this cultivar. Lower fruit quality and poor taste, if harvested too early, are disadvantages. This cultivar is adaptable and suitable for worse climatic and soil conditions.

3.1.6. Fabiola

Self-sterile bigarreu derived from crossing of cultivars ‘Van’ and ‘Kordia’. Trees are moderately vigorous, upright. The cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. The fruit is round with a dark red colour. Fruit flesh is moderately firm, pink, acidic–sweet, very juicy. Fruit weight averages 8.0–8.5 g. Fruit ripens shortly before ‘Kordia’. The moderate resistance of fruits to cracking and resistance of flowers to late-spring frosts are the advantages of this cultivar. Fruit flesh is softer than ‘Kordia’, which is a disadvantage for transportation and handling.

3.1.7. Halka

Self-fertile bigarreu derived from the crossing of the cultivars ‘Van’x Stella’. Trees are moderately vigorous to less vigorous, and upright. This cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are round to broadly rounded, dark red. The flesh is firm, dark red, sweet–acidic. Fruit weight averages 8.5–9.5 g. Fruits ripen at the same time as ‘Kordia’. Self-fertility is an advantage of the cultivar. It can be grown as a solitaire tree in cottages or gardens, where there is no possibility of pollination by another cultivar. Susceptibility to the fungal disease Monilia is the main disadvantage. It has a slight tendency to exhibit a poor formation of fruiting spurs.

3.1.8. Helga

Early, self-sterile sweet cherry (guigne), a cross between ‘Kaštánka’ and ‘Moreau’. Trees are moderately vigorous, upright. Cultivar flowers moderately early and bears early. Productivity is very good. Fruits usually ripen in the second sweet cherry week. Fruits are broadly rounded with dark red skin colour. Flesh is soft, red, slightly sour, juicy. Fruit weight is usually 7.5–8.5 g. The fruit ripening time is similar to ‘Burlat’. Early ripening, large fruit size, resistance to cracking, and resistance to flower damage by Monilinia laxa and Monilia rot are the advantages of this cultivar. Susceptibility to late-spring frost is a disadvantage.

3.1.9. Horka

Self-sterile bigarreu, which originates from open pollination of ‘Van’. Trees are vigorous, moderately vigorous in full bearing, and upright. The cultivar flowers moderately late and is only moderately productive, and early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fourth sweet cherry week. Fruits are round with a dark red colour of the skin. The flesh is very firm, red, sweet, and juicy. Fruit weight is usually between 9.0 and 10.5 g. Fruits ripen 2 weeks after ‘Burlat’. Very large and firm fruits, together with the horizontal position of the scaffold branches are the main advantages of this cultivar. Disadvantages are susceptibility of flowers to Monilinia laxa and low fruit set.

3.1.10. Christiana

Self-sterile bigarreu, resulting from the crossing of cultivars (‘Van’ and ‘Kordia’). Trees are moderately vigorous, spreading. Cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are flat-rounded to wide-rounded with dark red colour of the skin. Fruit flesh is firm, acidic–sweet, very good. Fruit weight is moderately large to large (8.5–9.0 g). Fruits ripen nearly one week before ‘Kordia’. Poor formation of fruiting spurs is the main disadvantage.

3.1.11. Irena

Self-sterile bigarreu derived from the crossing of the cultivar ‘Kordia’ with the English cultivar ‘Merton Reward’. Trees are less to moderately vigorous, upright. The cultivar flowers very late. Trees are moderately productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the sixth sweet cherry week. Fruits are round, brown-red. The flesh is firm, red, acidic–sweet, juicy. The weight of the fruit averages 9.0–10.0 g. Very late flowering and size and firmness of fruit are the main advantages. Moderate susceptibility to fruit cracking and short flowering period are disadvantages. Fruits ripen a few days after ‘Kordia’. This cultivar is recommended as a pollinator for ‘Regina’.

3.1.12. Jacinta

Self-sterile semi-bigarreu, selected from the progeny from open pollination of the cultivar ‘Vega’. The trees are vigorous, semi-upright. The cultivar flowers moderately late and bears early. Fruits usually ripen in the third sweet cherry week. The fruit is cordate with a dark red colour of the skin. Fruit flesh is moderately firm, but softer than the ‘Burlat’ cultivar, dark red, sweet–acidic, moderately juicy. Fruit weight is usually 8.5–9.5 g. Fruits ripen 6 days after ‘Burlat’. Early ripening, size, and the good shape of fruits are the advantages of this cultivar. It is moderately resistant to cracking; cracks are usually only around the stem pit. Susceptibility to Monilia and softer flesh are the main drawbacks. Cultivar is productive on less vigorous rootstocks and mazzard. It is recommended as suitable cultivar for direct sale by growers.

3.1.13. Justyna

Self-sterile bigarreu originates from the crossing of cultivars ‘Kordia’ and ‘Starking Hardy Giant’. Trees are moderately vigorous, spreading and slightly reclinate. Cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are flat rounded with brown-red skin colour. Fruit flesh is firm, acidic–sweet, very good, moderately juicy. Fruits are large (9.5–10.5 g) and ripen several days before ‘Kordia’. The size of fruits, productivity, and very good taste are the advantages of this cultivar. Susceptibility of flowers to late-spring frosts is the main disadvantage.

3.1.14. Kasandra

Self-sterile semi-bigarreu originating from a cross between ‘Burlat’ and ‘Sunburst’. Trees are moderately vigorous, upright. Cultivar flowers moderately early and bears early. Fruits usually ripen in the second sweet cherry week. Fruits are broadly rounded with dark-red skin colour. Fruit flesh is moderately firm similar to ‘Burlat’, sweet–acidic, juicy. Fruit weight is usually 7.5–9.0 g without irrigation. Fruits ripen shortly after ‘Burlat’. Early ripening, productivity, and large and firm fruit are the advantages of this cultivar. Cultivar is productive on less vigorous rootstocks and mazzard. Fruits are suitable for direct consumption and processing.

3.1.15. Korvik

Self-sterile bigarreu, crossing of ‘Kordia’ and ‘Vic’. Trees are moderately vigorous to vigorous, very globular. Beginning of flowering is late. Cultivar is productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are heart-shaped with dark red colour of the skin. Fruit flesh is dark red, firm, juicy, acidic–sweet, very good. Fruit weight is usually 8.0–9.0 g on average. Fruits ripen shortly before ‘Kordia’. Thanks to its later flowering, the flowers can escape spring frosts.

3.1.16. Lívia

Self-sterile bigarreu originating from the open pollination of ‘Těchlovická 1’. Trees are moderately vigorous to vigorous, semi-upright. The cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are productive, and bear early. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are heart-shaped with red colour of the skin. Fruit weight is 7.5–9.0 g on average and it ripens one week before ‘Kordia’. Large fruit size is the advantage of this cultivar. Susceptibility of flowers to late-spring frosts is a disadvantage.

3.1.17. Marta

Self-sterile semi-bigarreu, derived from a cross between ‘Kordia’ and ‘Early Rivers’. Trees are moderately vigorous, later less vigorous, semi-erect. The cultivar flowers moderately early and is very productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the second sweet cherry week. Fruits are rounded with dark red skin colour. The flesh is moderately firm, dark red, sweet–sour to sweet, juicy. Fruit weight is usually 7.0–7.5 g. Fruits ripen 3 days after ‘Burlat’. Early ripening and good taste are the main advantages of this cultivar. The variety is suitable for self-supply for smaller growers, who want early and relatively high-quality cherries.

3.1.18. Sandra

Self-sterile bigarreu-cross of seedling No. 13 and ‘Kordia’. Trees are moderately vigorous to vigorous, semi-upright. The cultivar flowers moderately late. Trees are moderately productive, bearing early. Fruits usually ripen in the fourth sweet cherry week. Fruits are heart-shaped with a dark red colour of the skin. The flesh is moderately firm, sweet–acidic, very juicy. Fruit flesh is firm, acid sweet, very tasty. Fruits are very large 10.0–10.5 g. Fruits ripen one week before ‘Kordia’. Very large fruits and resistance to cracking are the main advantages of this cultivar. Compared to other cultivars, relatively soft flesh is a disadvantage.

3.1.19. Sylvana

Self-sterile bigarreu, derived from the crossing of the cultivars ‘Kordia’ and ‘Van’. Trees are moderately to less vigorous, upright. The cultivar flowers moderately early. Trees are very productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fourth sweet cherry week. Fruits are round to wide rounded with dark red colour of the skin. The flesh is firm, dark red, sour–sweet, juicy, very good. Fruit weight is usually between 7.0 and 8.5 g. Fruits ripen one week before ‘Kordia’. Large firm fruits and tree growth with horizontal scaffold branches are the main advantages of this cultivar. Susceptibility to Monilinia laxa fungal disease is the main disadvantage.

3.1.20. Tamara

Self-sterile bigarreu, which originates from the crossing of cultivars ‘Krupnoplodnaja’ בVan’. Trees are moderately vigorous, upright. Cultivar flowers moderately early. Trees are very productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are broadly rounded to rounded, dark red. Flesh is firm, sweet to very sweet, juicy. Fruit weight averages 9.0–11.0 g. Fruits ripen at the same time as ‘Kordia’. Size and firmness of fruits and very sweet taste are the main advantages. The variety is suitable for the global market as well as for self-supply by smaller growers.

3.1.21. Těchlovan

Self-sterile bigarreu, which originates from the crossing of the cultivars ‘Van’ and ‘Kordia’. Trees are moderately vigorous to vigorous, upright. The cultivar flowers moderately early. Trees are moderately productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fourth sweet cherry week. Fruits are flat rounded with dark red colour of the skin. Fruit flesh is very firm, pinkish, acidic–sweet, very good, juicy. Fruits are large (8.0–9.0 g). Fruits ripen one week before ‘Kordia’. Big fruits and very good taste of fruits are advantages of this cultivar. Susceptibility of flowers to the fungal disease Monilinia laxa is the main disadvantage.

3.1.22. Tim

Self-sterile bigarreu resulting from the crossing of cultivars ‘Krupnoplodnaja’ × ‘Van’. Trees are moderately vigorous, upright. Cultivar flowers late. Trees are moderately productive, early-bearing. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are broadly rounded. Flesh is firm, acidic–sweet to sweet, slightly astringent aroma, moderately juicy. Fruit weight is at average 8.5–10.0 g. Fruits ripen at the same time as ‘Kordia’. Fruits of this cultivar are attractive. One disadvantage is the moderate resistance of the flowers to late-spring frosts.

3.1.23. Vanda

Self-sterile bigarreu, which originates from the crossing of ‘Kordia’ and ‘Van’. Trees are less vigorous, upright. Cultivar flowers early and is very productive, bears early and regularly. Fruits usually ripen in the fourth sweet cherry week. Fruits are rounded with dark red colour of fruit skin. Fruit flesh is firm, dark red, sweet, juicy. Fruit weight is usually 6.5–8.0 g. Fruits ripen 2 weeks after ‘Burlat’. Very high productivity and the resistance to cracking of fruits are advantages of this cultivar. One disadvantage is the only average size of fruits for commercial use.

3.1.24. Vilma

Self-sterile bigarreu, crossing of ‘Kordia’ and ‘Vic’. Trees are moderately vigorous, upright. The cultivar flowers moderately early. Cultivar is very productive, bears early. Fruits usually ripen in the fifth sweet cherry week. Fruits are rounded with dark red colour of the skin. Fruit flesh is moderately firm, dark red, very sweet. Fruit weight is usually between 7.5 and 8.5 g. It ripens at the same time as ‘Kordia’. High productivity is an advantage of this cultivar. The susceptibility of fruits to the fungal disease Monilia is the main disadvantage.

4. Conclusions

The phenotypic characterization carried out in our study showed high diversity of the analyzed sweet cherry cultivars. For this reason, the evaluated vegetative and fruit characters represent an important tool in order to reveal the potential of particular cultivars for commercial plantations. Based on the overall results of the evaluation, we recommend high-quality late-ripening cultivars with a fruit weight higher than 9 g for commercial growing and exporting for countries with a temperate climate in the northern hemisphere. These cultivars could extend the harvest period up to the first half of July. Especially from the beginning of the fourth week of ripening, the late-ripening cultivars ‘Horka’, ‘Irena’, ‘Justyna’, ‘Sandra’, and ‘Tamara’ outperformed in terms of fruit size and taste quality. For self-supply and on smaller farms with organic cultivation systems, on the other hand, earlier-maturing varieties can be advantageous. They escape the cherry fruit fly (Rhagoletis cerasi) pest through early fruit development and expand the offer of fresh fruit when sold directly from the farm. When combined with the results of molecular genetic studies, the information obtained should also be used for the genetic improvement in sweet cherry breeding programmes. We are currently continuing to evaluate other cherry cultivars bred at RBIP for commercialization in world markets. It can be expected that the diversity in the offered portfolio of sweet cherries can be an advantage for breeding entities, so that the diverse expectations of customers in differently located global fruit markets can be met. A genetically broader portfolio of sweet cherries in growing enterprises can also contribute to the stability of agro-ecosystems in the face of a changing climate.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.S., B.K. and F.P.; methodology, J.S., B.K., J.Č. and F.P.; validation, J.S., B.K. and J.Č.; formal analysis, J.S., B.K. and J.Č.; investigation J.S., B.K., J.Č. and F.P.; resources J.B., B.K. and F.P.; data curation, J.S., B.K, L.P. and J.Č.; writing—original draft preparation, J.S., B.K., L.P. and J.Č.; writing—review and editing, J.S., B.K., L.P., J.Č. and F.P.; visualization, L.P.; supervision, J.S., B.K. and F.P.; project administration, B.K. and F.P.; funding acquisition, B.K. and F.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by National Programme on Conservation and Utilization of Plant Genetic Resources and Agrobiodiversity No.: MZE-62216/2022-13113/6.2.4 and grant No. RO1524.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Data available on request.

Acknowledgments

We thank František Švec for the English proofreading.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors was employed by the company Research and Breeding Institute of Pomology Holovousy Ltd. All authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Shirasawa, K.; Isuzugawa, K.; Ikenaga, M.; Saito, Y.; Yamamoto, T.; Hirakawa, H.; Isobe, S. The Genome Sequence of Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium) for Use in Genomics-Assisted Breeding. DNA Res. 2017, 24, 499–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Prskavec, K.; Sedlak, J.; Paprštein, F.; Mrkvica, L.; Metelka, L. Padesát Pět Let Meteorologických Pozorování v Holovousích (1955–2009); Výzkumný a Šlechtitelský Ústav Ovocnářský Holovousy s.r.o.: Holovousy, Czech Republic, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  3. Čmejlová, J.; Paprštein, F.; Suran, P.; Zelený, L.; Čmejla, R. A New One-Tube Reaction Assay for the Universal Determination of Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Self-(In)Compatible MGST- and S-Alleles Using Capillary Fragment Analysis. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 6931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Yue, C.; Gallardo, R.K.; Luby, J.J.; Rihn, A.L.; McFerson, J.R.; McCracken, V.; Oraguzie, N.; Weebadde, C.; Sebolt, A.; Iezzoni, A. An Evaluation of U.S. Tart and Sweet Cherry Producers Trait Prioritization: Evidence from Audience Surveys. HortScience Horts 2014, 49, 931–937. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Zheng, X.; Gallardo, K.; Mccracken, V.; Luby, J.; McFerson, J. What Attributes Are Consumers Looking for in Sweet Cherries? Evidence from Choice Experiments. Agric. Resour. Econ. Rev. 2016, 45, 124–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Barreneche, T.; Concepción, M.; Delmas, M.; Ordidge, M.; Nybom, H.; Lacis, G.; Feldmane, D.; Sedlak, J.; Meland, M.; Kaldmäe, H.; et al. SSR-Based Analysis of Genetic Diversity and Structure of Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) from 19 Countries in Europe. Plants 2021, 10, 1983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Mariette, S.; Tavaud-Pirra, M.; Arunyawat, U.; Capdeville, G.; Millan, M.; Salin, F. Population Structure and Genetic Bottleneck in Sweet Cherry Estimated with SSRs and the Gametophytic Self-Incompatibility Locus. BMC Genet. 2010, 11, 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Krmpot, T.; Radoš, L.; Vokurka, A. Genetic Characterisation of Autochthonous Sweet Cherry Genotypes (Prunus avium L.) Using SSR Markers. Genetika 2020, 52, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Sharma, K.; Xuan, H.; Sedlák, P. Assessment of Genetic Diversity of Czech Sweet Cherry Cultivars Using Microsatellite Markers. Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2015, 63, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Holušová, K.; Čmejlová, J.; Suran, P.; Čmejla, R.; Sedlak, J.; Zeleny, L.; Bartoš, J. High-Resolution Genome-Wide Association Study of a Large Czech Collection of Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) on Fruit Maturity and Quality Traits. Hortic. Res. 2022, 10, uhac233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Donkpegan, A.; Bernard, A.; Barreneche, T.; Quero Garcia, J.; Bonnet, H.; Fouché, M.; Le Dantec, L.; Wenden, B.; Dirlewanger, E. Genome-Wide Association Mapping in a Sweet Cherry Germplasm Collection (Prunus avium L.) Reveals Candidate Genes for Fruit Quality Traits. Hortic. Res. 2023, 10, uhad191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Holušová, K.; Čmejlová, J.; Zdarska, I.; Suran, P.; Čmejla, R.; Sedlak, J.; Zeleny, L.; Bartoš, J. New Markers for Flowering-Time Selection in Sweet Cherry. Sci. Hortic. 2024, 332, 113226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ganopoulos, I.; Moysiadis, T.; Aliki, X.; Ganopoulou, M.; Avramidou, E.; Filippos, A.; Tani, E.; Madesis, P.; Athanasios, T.; Kazantzis, K. Diversity of Morpho-Physiological Traits in Worldwide Sweet Cherry Cultivars of GeneBank Collection Using Multivariate Analysis. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 197, 381–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Rakonjac, V.; Mratinić, E.; Jovkovic, R.; Fotiric, A.M. Analysis of Morphological Variability in Wild Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Genetic Resources from Central Serbia. J. Agric. Sci. Technol. 2014, 16, 151–162. [Google Scholar]
  15. Stankovic Nedjic, M.; Župunski, M.; Orlović, S.; Kovacevic, B.; Kebert, M.; Vastag, E.; Miljković, D.; Gutalj, M.; Gavranović Markić, A.; Stojnic, S. Assessment of the Phenotypic Diversity of Wild Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Populations and Halfsib Lines by Multivariate Statistical Analyses. Silvae Genet. 2023, 71, 116–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Devasirvatham, V.; Tan, D. Key Determinants of the Physiological and Fruit Quality Traits in Sweet Cherries and Their Importance in a Breeding Programme. Horticulturae 2022, 8, 694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Avramidou, E.; Moysiadis, T.; Ganopoulos, I.; Michailidis, M.; Kissoudis, C.; Valasiadis, D.; Kazantzis, K.; Tsaroucha, E.; Molassiotis, A.; Filippos, A.; et al. Phenotypic, Genetic, and Epigenetic Variation among Diverse Sweet Cherry Gene Pools. Agronomy 2021, 11, 680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Skřivanová, A.; Blažková, J. Pollination Relations among Selected Sweet Cherry Cultivars. Vědecké práce ovocnářské 2015, 24, 67–72. [Google Scholar]
  19. Paprštein, F.; Blažková, J.; Blažek, J.; Sehnalová, J. Klasifikátor, Descriptor List, Genus Cerasus Mill; VÚRV: Praha Ruzyně, Czech Republic, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  20. Hajkova, L.; Mozny, M.; Oušková, V.; Bartošová, L.; Dížková, P.; Zalud, Z. Increasing Risk of Spring Frost Occurrence during the Cherry Tree Flowering in Times of Climate Change. Water 2023, 15, 497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Demirsoy, H.; Demirsoy, L.; Lang, G. Research on Spring Frost Damage in Cherries. Hortic. Sci. 2022, 49, 89–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Blažková, J. Resistance to Abiotic and Biotic Stressors in Sweet Cherry Rootstocks and Cultivars from the Czech Republic. J. Fruit Ornam. Plant Res. 2004, 12, 303–311. [Google Scholar]
  23. Blazkova, J.; Hlusickova, I. Testing of Wood Hardiness to Winter Freezes in Selections from Progenies of Cerapadus * Prunus avium L. Crosses. Hortic. Sci. 2002, 29, 133–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Djordjevic, B.; Djurovic, D.; Zec, G.; Boskov, D. The Influence of Rootstocks on the Sensitivity of Flower Buds to Frost and the Main Properties of the ‘Carmen’ Sweet Cherry Cultivar. J. Agric. Sci. 2021, 66, 351–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Muñoz Sanz, J.; Zuriaga, E.; Cruz-García, F.; McClure, B.; Romero, C. Self-(In)Compatibility Systems: Target Traits for Crop-Production, Plant Breeding, and Biotechnology. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Tehrani, G.; Brown, S. Pollen-Incompatibility and Self-Fertility in Sweet Cherry. In Plant Breeding Reviews; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; Volume 9, pp. 367–388. ISBN 978-0-470-65036-3. [Google Scholar]
  27. Matsumoto, D.; Tao, R. Recognition of S-RNases by an S Locus F-Box like Protein and an S Haplotype-Specific F-Box like Protein in the Prunus-Specific Self-Incompatibility System. Plant Mol. Biol. 2019, 100, 367–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Schuster, M.; Schröpfer, S. Self-Incompatibility (S) Genotypes of Cultivated Sweet Cherries—An Overview 2023-Update 2023. [CrossRef]
  29. Nacouzi, D.; Masry, R.; Kayal, W. Quality and Phytochemical Composition of Sweet Cherry Cultivars Can Be Influenced by Altitude. Plants 2023, 12, 2254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Hrotko, K.; Németh-Csigai, K.; Magyar, L.; Ficzek, G. Growth and Productivity of Sweet Cherry Varieties on Hungarian Clonal Prunus Mahaleb (L.) Rootstocks. Horticulturae 2023, 9, 198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Quero Garcia, J.; Schuster, M.; Ortega, G.; Charlot, G. Sweet Cherry Varieties and Improvement. In Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses; CABI: Napa, CA, USA, 2017; pp. 60–94. ISBN 978-1-78064-837-8. [Google Scholar]
  32. Jiang, S.; Xiong, K.; Xiao, J. Structure and Stability of Agroforestry Ecosystems: Insights into the Improvement of Service Supply Capacity of Agroforestry Ecosystems under the Karst Rocky Desertification Control. Forests 2022, 13, 878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Nishizawa, T.; Kay, S.; Schuler, J.; Klein, N.; Herzog, F.; Aurbacher, J.; Zander, P. Ecological-Economic Modelling of Traditional Agroforestry to Promote Farmland Biodiversity with Cost-Effective Payments. Sustainability 2022, 14, 5615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ramírez, F.; Davenport, T. Apple Pollination: A Review. Sci. Hortic. 2013, 162, 188–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Abrol, D.P. Diversity of Pollinating Insects Visiting Litchi Flowers (Litchi Chinensis Sonn.) and Path Analysis of Environmental Factors Influencing Foraging Behaviour of Four Honeybee Species. J. Apic. Res. 2006, 45, 180–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Corbet, S.A.; Saville, N.M.; Fussell, M.; Prŷs-Jones, O.E.; Unwin, D.M. The Competition Box: A Graphical Aid to Forecasting Pollinator Performance. J. Appl. Ecol. 1995, 32, 707–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Turner, J.; Seavert, C.; Colonna, A.; Long, L. Consumer Sensory Evaluation of Sweet Cherry Cultivars in Oregon, U.S.A. Acta Horticulturae 2007, 795, 781–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Lyngstat, L.; Sekse, L. Economic Aspects of Developing a High Sweet Cherry Product in Norway. Acta Hortic. 1995, 379, 313–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Szilagyi, S.; Horváth-Kupi, T.; Desiderio, F.; Bekefi, Z. Evaluation of Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Cultivars for Fruit Size by FW_G2a QTL Analysis and Phenotypic Characterization. Sci. Hortic. 2022, 292, 110656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lanauskas, J.; Kviklys, D.; Uselis, N.; Stanys, V. Performance of Sweet Cherry Cultivars and Advanced Selections on Gisela 5 Rootstock in Young Orchards. Plants 2023, 12, 614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Bujdosó, G.; Hrotko, K.; Feldmane, D.; Giovannini, D.; Demirsoy, H.; Tao, R.; Ercisli, S.; Ertek, N.; Malchev, S. What kind of sweet cherries do the final consumers prefer? South West. J. Hortic. Biol. Environ. 2020, 11, 37–48. [Google Scholar]
  42. Chaovanalikit, A.; Wrolstad, R. Anthocyanin and Polyphenolic Composition of Fresh and Processed Cherries. J. Food Sci. 2004, 69, FCT73–FCT83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mattioli, R.; Francioso, A.; Mosca, L.; Silva, P. Anthocyanins: A Comprehensive Review of Their Chemical Properties and Health Effects on Cardiovascular and Neurodegenerative Diseases. Molecules 2020, 25, 3809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sansavini, S.; Lugli, S. Sweet Cherry Breeding Programs in Europe and Asia. Acta Hortic. 2008, 795, 41–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Vavoura, M.; Badeka, A.; Kontakos, S.; Kontominas, M. Characterization of Four Popular Sweet Cherry Cultivars Grown in Greece by Volatile Compound and Physicochemical Data Analysis and Sensory Evaluation. Molecules 2015, 20, 1922–1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Magri, A.; Malorni, L.; Cozzolino, R.; Adiletta, G.; Siano, F.; Picariello, G.; Cice, D.; Capriolo, G.; Nunziata, A.; Matteo, M.; et al. Agronomic, Physicochemical, Aromatic and Sensory Characterization of Four Sweet Cherry Accessions of the Campania Region. Plants 2023, 12, 610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Karageorgiadou, M.; Rodovitou, M.; Nasiopoulou, E.; Titeli, V.S.; Michailidis, M. Sweet Cherry Fruit Firmness Evaluation Using Compression Distance Methods. Horticulturae 2024, 10, 435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Villavicencio, J.; Zoffoli, J.; Plotto, A.; Contreras, C. Aroma Compounds Are Responsible for an Herbaceous Off-Flavor in the Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Cv. Regina during Fruit Development. Agronomy 2021, 11, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Huang, W.; Gao, Z.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Y.; Fu, X. Advances in Research on Cherry Fruit Cracking: Causes, Prevention and Control. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 986. [Google Scholar]
  50. Pereira, S.; Silva, V.; Bacelar, E.; Guedes, F.; Silva, A.; Ribeiro, C.; Gonçalves, B. Cracking in Sweet Cherry Cultivars Early Bigi and Lapins: Correlation with Quality Attributes. Plants 2020, 9, 1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Correia, S.; Schouten, R.; Silva, A.P.; Gonçalves, B. Sweet Cherry Fruit Cracking Mechanisms and Prevention Strategies: A Review. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 240, 369–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Karl, T.R.; Arguez, A.; Huang, B.; Lawrimore, J.; Mcmahon, J.; Menne, M.; Peterson, T.; Vose, R.; Zhang, H.-M. CLIMATE CHANGE. Possible Artifacts of Data Biases in the Recent Global Surface Warming Hiatus. Science 2015, 348, 1469–1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Sedlak, J.; Paprstein, F. Evolution of Climatic Conditions and Its Potential Impact on Sweet Cherry in RBIP Holovousy Ltd. Acta Hortic. 2017, 1162, 13–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Paunović, G.; Hajder, Đ.; Korićanac, A.; Pašalić, B.; Glišić, I.; Cvetkovic, M.; Cvetković, M. Preferences in Sweet Cherry Fruits among Consumers in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Hortic. Sci. 2022, 49, 189–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Antognoni, F.; Potente, G.; Mandrioli, R.; Angeloni, C.; Freschi, M.; Malaguti, M.; Hrelia, S.; Lugli, S.; Gennari, F.; Muzzi, E.; et al. Fruit Quality Characterization of New Sweet Cherry Cultivars as a Good Source of Bioactive Phenolic Compounds with Antioxidant and Neuroprotective Potential. Antioxidants 2020, 9, 677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Szpadzik, E.; Krupa, T.; Molska-Kawulok, K.; Przybyłko, S. Fruit Quality and Contents of Some Bioactive Compounds in Selected Czech Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Cultivars under Conditions of Central Poland. Agriculture 2022, 12, 1859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kalyoncu, I.; Ersoy, N.; Yilmaz, M. Contents of Sweet Cherry (Prunus avium L.) Type Grown in Konya. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2009, 8, 2744–2749. [Google Scholar]
Table 1. Vegetative characters.
Table 1. Vegetative characters.
CultivarsBeginning of Flowering
(Days) 		End of Flowering
(Days) 		Flower SetFruit Set Time of Ripening of Fruits (Days)
Average ± SDCV (%)SEAverage ± SDCV (%)SEAverage ± SDCV (%)SEAverage ± SDCV (%)SEAverage ± SDCV (%)SE
Adélka103.0 ± 2.01.90.9116.6 ± 1.91.70.97.2 ± 0.46.20.24.4 ± 1.125.90.5152.6 ± 5.23.42.0
Amid108.8 ± 3.12.91.4121.0 ± 4.53.72.06.2 ± 1.117.70.54.4 ± 1.841.30.8176.8 ± 8.64.93.8
Aranka104.7 ± 3.03.01.4117.0 ± 2.92.51.36.8 ± 0.812.30.43.8 ± 2.053.90.9159.8 ± 7.04.43.1
Debora107.6 ± 1.81.70.8123.6 ± 2.62.11.26.8 ± 0.46.60.23.6 ± 2.157.60.9171.3 ± 6.23.62.9
Early Korvik109.3 ± 5.14.73.0119.3 ± 5.04.22.95.0 ± 1.020.00.62.0 ± 1.050.00.6176.0 ± 0.08.37.1
Fabiola108.0 ± 1.91.70.8122.4 ± 3.22.61.46.8 ± 0.812.30.45.0 ± 1.634.60.8177.8 ± 9.35.23.8
Halka109.0 ± 1.21.10.5120.28 ± 4.03.31.86.0 ± 1.016.70.44.4 ± 1.534.50.7178.6 ± 6.03.42.2
Helga106.6 ± 1.71.60.7119.0 ± 3.12.61.46.8 ± 0.812.30.44.0 ± 1.230.60.5160.2 ± 7.14.43.0
Horka110.0 ± 1.91.70.8121.6 ± 5.04.12.27.0 ± 0.710.10.33.8 ± 1.847.10.8173.6 ± 7.04.02.7
Christiana115.0 ± 5.74.94.0124.5 ± 7.86.25.54.0 ± 2.870.72.01.5 ± 0.747.10.5180.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Irena105.5 ± 2.12.01.5116.5 ± 3.53.02.56.0 ± 0.00.00.02.5 ± 0.728.30.5189.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Jacinta110.0 ± 3.63.32.1124.8 ± 3.02.41.46.8 ± 0.46.60.24.4 ± 1.330.50.6164.8 ± 7.54.63.0
Justyna108.2 ± 1.81.70.8122.0 ± 1.71.40.87.0 ± 0.00.00.05.0 ± 1.631.60.7178.2 ± 5.63.12.5
Kasandra106.0 ± 2.01.90.9117.4 ± 2.92.51.36.2 ± 0.47.20.24.6 ± 1.124.80.5160.6 ± 7.24.53.1
Korvik109.0 ± 5.65.13.2121.8 ± 4.23.52.45.0 ± 1.020.00.63.3 ± 2.163.11.2179.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Lívia108.3 ± 2.42.21.1122.0 ± 2.82.31.36.2 ± 0.47.20.23.8 ± 1.847.10.8175.4 ± 8.44.82.9
Marta107.6 ± 1.51.40.7120.4 ± 3.02.51.36.8 ± 0.46.60.25.4 ± 0.916.60.4162.0 ± 6.94.32.8
Sandra108.5 ± 2.52.31.1122.4 ± 3.22.61.47.0 ± 1.014.30.44.6 ± 2.145.10.9174.4 ± 7.24.12.9
Sylvana107.4 ± 1.81.70.8119.2 ± 2.42.01.17.0 ± 0.710.10.35.2 ± 1.631.60.7174.2 ± 7.24.13.2
Tamara107.2 ± 1.81.70.8117.3 ± 3.83.02.57.0 ± 0.710.10.35.2 ± 0.48.60.2179.6 ± 6.33.52.5
Těchlovan107.8 ± 2.22.11.0119.9 ± 0.20.20.17.0 ± 0.00.00.03.8 ± 1.950.60.9174.8 ± 8.54.73.8
Tim109.2 ± 2.82.51.2121.0 ± 3.22.71.46.2 ± 1.117.70.53.2 ± 1.340.70.6176.2 ± 8.74.93.2
Vanda105.8 ± 3.53.31.6115.5 ± 0.10.10.17.2 ± 0.46.20.26.2 ± 1.931.00.9174.5 ± 6.42.82.0
Vilma107.0 ± 2.22.11.0119.8 ± 1.10.90.57.0 ± 0.710.10.35.4 ± 1.121.10.5179.6 ± 6.33.52.5
Burlat104.2 ± 3.53.41.6116.0 ± 1.81.21.06.8 ± 0.812.30.44.8 ± 2.347.51.0159.0 ± 5.53.52.1
Kordia105.8 ± 1.61.60.7120.5 ± 2.52.51.56.6 ± 0.913.60.44.8 ± 2.245.21.0179.6 ± 4.82.71.7
Früh. der Mark101.8 ± 3.33.21.7111.0 ± 2.42.41.57.2 ± 0.46.20.25.8 ± 1.628.30.7148.3 ± 9.75.93.8
Average length of a beginning of flowering period in Holovousy based on data in this study (days)10.4
Average length of a beginning of flowering period in Holovousy based on data from 235 genebank cultivars in days [12] 13.4
Table 2. Fruit characters.
Table 2. Fruit characters.
a
CultivarsFruit Weight (g) Colour of Fruit Colouring Ability of Juice JuicinessTexture
Average ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SE
Adélka5.5 ± 0.813.70.36.4 ± 0.58.60.26.4 ± 0.58.60.26.8 ± 0.46.60.26.4 ± 0.58.60.2
Amid7.6 ± 1.114.00.58.0 ± 0.00.00.06.8 ± 0.46.60.26.2 ± 0.47.20.24.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Aranka6.4 ± 0.69.20.38.0 ± 0.78.80.36.6 ± 0.58.30.27.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 1.016.70.4
Debora7.4 ± 0.811.40.18.0 ± 0.00.00.06.25 ± 115.30.57.3 ± 0.56.90.35.8 ± 0.58.70.3
Early Korvik9.1 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.04.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Fabiola8.4 ± 0.22.70.18.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.07.8 ± 0.45.70.26.2 ± 0.47.20.2
Halka8.5 ± 0.89.30.38.0 ± 0.00.00.06.6 ± 0.913.60.47.2 ± 0.46.20.26.0 ± 0.711.80.3
Helga7.9 ± 0.911.70.27.8 ± 0.45.70.26.2 ± 0.47.20.27.0 ± 0.00.00.06.8 ± 0.46.60.2
Horka9.7 ± 0.77.40.38.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.07.4 ± 0.57.40.26.2 ± 0.47.20.2
Christiana8.8 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.05.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Irena9.2 ± 0.11.10.16.7 ± 0.68.70.34.7 ± 0.612.40.37.0 ± 0.00.00.05.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Jacinta9.1 ± 1.516.70.47.8 ± 0.45.70.26.0 ± 0.00.00.07.2 ± 0.46.20.26.6 ± 0.58.30.2
Justyna9.9 ± 1.09.80.47.6 ± 0.57.20.25.6 ± 0.59.80.27.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Kasandra8.0 ± 0.79.40.37.0 ± 0.00.00.05.6 ± 0.59.80.27.6 ± 0.57.20.27.0 ± 0.710.10.3
Korvik8.5 ± 0.89.10.47.3 ± 0.67.90.36.3 ± 0.69.10.37.0 ± 0.00.00.05.3 ± 1.221.70.7
Lívia7.8 ± 1.619.80.78.0 ± 0.00.00.05.0 ± 0.00.00.07.4 ± 0.57.40.25.2 ± 0.48.60.2
Marta7.1 ± 1.014.40.48.0 ± 0.00.00.06.2 ± 0.47.20.27.0 ± 0.00.00.06.2 ± 0.813.50.4
Sandra10.4 ± 1.413.70.68.0 ± 0.00.00.05.6 ± 0.59.80.27.4 ± 0.57.40.26.2 ± 0.47.20.2
Sylvana7.7 ± 0.78.70.37.8 ± 0.45.70.25.6 ± 0.916.00.47.0 ± 0.00.00.06.2 ± 0.813.50.4
Tamara9.4 ± 0.88.90.47.4 ± 0.57.40.25.8 ± 1.322.50.67.2 ± 0.46.20.25.8 ± 0.47.70.2
Těchlovan8.0 ± 2.025.41.08.0 ± 0.00.00.05.8 ± 0.58.70.36.8 ± 0.57.40.36.5 ± 0.68.90.3
Tim8.8 ± 1.112.50.38.2 ± 0.45.50.26.0 ± 0.00.00.07.6 ± 0.57.20.25.6 ± 0.59.80.2
Vanda6.7 ± 1.015.60.48.0 ± 0.00.00.06.6 ± 0.58.30.26.4 ± 0.58.60.25.8 ± 0.47.70.2
Vilma7.8 ± 0.67.40.27.8 ± 0.45.70.27.4 ± 0.57.40.27.0 ± 0.00.00.05.6 ± 0.59.80.2
Burlat7.4 ± 0.34.10.17.0 ± 0.00.00.06.5 ± 0.710.90.57.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Kordia7.4 ± 1.723.10.78.4 ± 0.56.50.27.2 ± 0.46.20.27.0 ± 0.00.00.05.6 ± 0.59.80.2
Früh.der Mark3.7 ± 0.615.90.26.0 ± 0.813.60.45.5 ± 0.610.50.36.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.0
b
CultivarsTasteFlavourSeparability of Stone from FleshSeparability of Stem from FruitResistance of Fruits to Cracking
Average ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SEAverage ±
SD		CV (%)SE
Adélka6.8 ± 0.46.60.26.0 ± 0.00.00.06.8 ± 0.812.30.49.0 ± 0.00.00.07.6 ± 2.634.31.2
Amid7.8 ± 0.45.70.26.8 ± 0.46.60.25.2 ± 0.48.60.28.8 ± 0.45.10.29.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Aranka7.0 ± 0.00.00.06.8 ± 0.46.60.27.6 ± 0.57.20.29.0 ± 0.00.00.08.0 ± 2.228.01.0
Debora7.5 ± 0.67.70.37.0 ± 0.00.00.06.3 ± 1.320.10.66.0 ± 0.00.00.09.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Early Korvik5.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.02.0 ± 0.00.00.08.0 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Fabiola7.4 ± 0.57.40.26.8 ± 0.46.60.26.8 ± 0.46.60.27.8 ± 1.316.70.68.6 ± 0.910.40.4
Halka7.4 ± 0.57.40.27.0 ± 0.00.00.05.8 ± 0.47.70.28.4 ± 0.56.50.28.8 ± 0.45.10.2
Helga7.0 ± 0.00.00.06.4 ± 0.58.60.27.8 ± 0.45.70.29.0 ± 0.00.00.08.4 ± 1.316.00.6
Horka7.6 ± 0.57.20.26.8 ± 0.46.60.27.4 ± 0.57.40.28.0 ± 1.012.50.48.8 ± 0.45.10.2
Christiana7.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.05.0 ± 0.00.00.05.0 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Irena7.0 ± 0.00.00.06.7 ± 0.68.70.34.0 ± 1.743.31.07.7 ± 1.215.10.75.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Jacinta7.8 ± 0.45.70.27.0 ± 0.00.00.06.2 ± 0.47.20.28.4 ± 0.56.50.28.6 ± 0.910.40.4
Justyna8.0 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.711.80.36.0 ± 1.220.40.58.6 ± 0.910.40.4
Kasandra7.4 ± 0.57.40.27.0 ± 0.00.00.06.6 ± 0.58.30.25.8 ± 1.830.80.87.4 ± 1.722.60.7
Korvik5.7 ± 0.520.40.75.7 ± 1.220.40.74.7 ± 1.224.70.76.7 ± 1.217.30.77.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Lívia7.6 ± 0.57.20.27.0 ± 0.00.00.05.8 ± 0.47.70.27.6 ± 1.317.70.68.6 ± 0.910.40.4
Marta7.4 ± 0.57.40.26.6 ± 0.58.30.27.2 ± 1.115.20.56.6 ± 1.117.30.58.2 ± 1.315.90.6
Sandra7.4 ± 0.57.40.26.6 ± 0.58.30.27.2 ± 0.811.60.46.2 ± 0.47.20.28.6 ± 0.910.40.4
Sylvana7.0 ± 0.00.00.06.0 ± 0.00.00.06.4 ± 0.58.60.27.6 ± 1.115.00.58.8 ± 0.45.10.2
Tamara7.2 ± 0.46.20.27.0 ± 0.710.10.36.4 ± 0.58.60.29.0 ± 0.00.00.08.6 ± 0.910.40.4
Těchlovan7.5 ± 0.67.70.37.0 ± 0.00.00.06.8 ± 0.57.40.36.3 ± 1.524.00.89.0 ± 0.00.00.0
Tim7.0 ± 0.00.00.06.4 ± 0.58.60.26.8 ± 0.812.30.48.6 ± 0.56.40.28.4 ± 1.316.00.6
Vanda6.8 ± 0.812.30.46.6 ± 0.58.30.26.2 ± 0.47.20.26.6 ± 0.58.30.28.8 ± 0.45.10.2
Vilma7.8 ± 0.45.70.26.8 ± 0.812.30.45.2 ± 0.48.60.28.2 ± 0.810.20.48.4 ± 1.316.00.6
Burlat7.0 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.07.0 ± 0.00.00.08.0 ± 0.00.00.05.0 ± 4.284.93.0
Kordia7.0 ± 0.710.10.36.8 ± 0.46.60.26.0 ± 0.00.00.08.4 ± 0.56.50.28.8 ± 0.45.10.2
Früh.der Mark6.0 ± 0.813.60.45.5 ± 0.610.50.35.0 ± 0.00.00.08.3 ± 1.518.20.87.0 ± 4.057.12.0
Table 3. S-alleles and pollinating pairs.
Table 3. S-alleles and pollinating pairs.
CultivarsPollination PartnersS-Alleles
AdélkaAranka, Irena, KasandraS1S6
VandaAranka, Irena, Kasandra, TamaraS1S6
ArankaAdélka, Vanda, Irena, TamaraS1S3
IrenaAdélka, Vanda, Aranka, Kasandra, Tamara, HelgaS4S6
KasandraAdélka, Vanda, Irena, Tamara, Sylvana, VilmaS1S3
TamaraVanda, Aranka, Irena, Kasandra, Helga, Sylvana, Vilma, Těchlovan, MartaS1S9
HelgaIrena, Tamara, Sylvana, Vilma, Těchlovan, Early Korvik, HalkaS1S3
SylvanaKasandra, Tamara, Helga, Vilma, Těchlovan, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, LíviaS1S6
VilmaKasandra, Tamara, Helga, Sylvana, Těchlovan, Marta, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, Lívia, FabiolaS2S6
TěchlovanTamara, Helga, Sylvana, Vilma, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, Lívia, Fabiola, Korvik, Sandra, Debora, HorkaS3S6
MartaTamara, Sylvana, Vilma, Těchlovan, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Tim, Lívia, Fabiola, Korvik, Sandra, Debora, HorkaS1S3
Early KorvikHelga, Sylvana, Těchlovan, Marta, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, Lívia, Fabiola, Sandra, Debora, HorkaS2S6
Halkanot needed, self-compatibleS1S4’
AmidSylvana, Vilma, Těchlovan, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Justyna, Tim, Fabiola, Korvik, Debora, HorkaS3S4
JustynaSylvana, Vilma, Těchlovan, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Tim, Lívia, Fabiola, Korvik, Sandra, Debora, HorkaS1S3
TimSylvana, Vilma, Těchlovan, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Lívia, Fabiola, Korvik, Sandra, Debora, HorkaS4S5
LíviaSylvana, Vilma, Těchlovan, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Justyna, Tim, Fabiola, Korvik, Debora, HorkaS3S4
FabiolaVilma, Těchlovan, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, Lívia, Korvik, Sandra, DeboraS1S6
KorvikVilma, Těchlovan, Marta, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, Lívia, Fabiola, Sandra, Debora, HorkaS2S6
SandraTěchlovan, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Justyna, Tim, Fabiola, Korvik, Debora, HorkaS3S4
DeboraTěchlovan, Marta, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, Lívia, Fabiola, Korvik, Sandra, Horka, JacintaS4S6
HorkaMarta, Early Korvik, Halka, Amid, Justyna, Tim, Lívia, Korvik, Sandra, Debora, JacintaS1S6
JacintaKorvik, Debora, HorkaS3S4
ChristiananoneS3S6
BurlatReference cultivar onlyS3S9
KordiaReference cultivar onlyS3S6
Früheste der MarkReference cultivar onlyS2S3
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Sedlák, J.; Krška, B.; Pavliuk, L.; Čmejlová, J.; Paprštein, F.; Blažková, J. Evaluation of Diversity of Newly Bred Czech Sweet Cherry Cultivars in Extensive Plantations. Diversity 2025, 17, 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17010065

AMA Style

Sedlák J, Krška B, Pavliuk L, Čmejlová J, Paprštein F, Blažková J. Evaluation of Diversity of Newly Bred Czech Sweet Cherry Cultivars in Extensive Plantations. Diversity. 2025; 17(1):65. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17010065

Chicago/Turabian Style

Sedlák, Jiří, Boris Krška, Liliia Pavliuk, Jana Čmejlová, František Paprštein, and Jitka Blažková. 2025. "Evaluation of Diversity of Newly Bred Czech Sweet Cherry Cultivars in Extensive Plantations" Diversity 17, no. 1: 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17010065

APA Style

Sedlák, J., Krška, B., Pavliuk, L., Čmejlová, J., Paprštein, F., & Blažková, J. (2025). Evaluation of Diversity of Newly Bred Czech Sweet Cherry Cultivars in Extensive Plantations. Diversity, 17(1), 65. https://doi.org/10.3390/d17010065

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop