Next Article in Journal
Changes in Fatty Acid Profiles in Seeds of Camellia oleifera Treated by Mycorrhizal Fungi and Glomalin
Previous Article in Journal
Diverse Flowering Response to Blue Light Manipulation: Application of Electric Lighting in Controlled-Environment Plant Production
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Horticulturae
Volume 10
Issue 6
10.3390/horticulturae10060579
horticulturae-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 thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Reduced Root Volume at Establishment, Canopy Growth and Fruit Production in ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ Sweet Cherry Trees

by
José Antonio Yuri
,
Daniela Simeone
,
Mauricio Fuentes
,
Álvaro Sepúlveda
,
Miguel Palma
,
Mariana Moya
and
Javier Sánchez-Contreras
*
Centro de Pomáceas, Facultad de Ciencias Agrarias, Universidad de Talca, Talca P.O. Box 747, Chile
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Horticulturae 2024, 10(6), 579; https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae10060579
Submission received: 1 March 2024 / Revised: 10 April 2024 / Accepted: 11 April 2024 / Published: 2 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Biotic and Abiotic Stress)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The success of establishing fruit orchards has traditionally been attributed to the vigor of the nursery plant used. This study aimed to evaluate the post-transplant survival, canopy growth and fruit productivity of two sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) cultivars (‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’) with different radicular basal volumes of 100%, 50% and 25% and nursery plant types: (i) bare root (BR) or (ii) bagged (B). The initial stem diameter of the plants ranged from 12 to 19 mm, and their height ranged from 1.4 to 1.8 m. Plants grafted onto ‘Colt’ rootstock exhibited twice the initial root volume compared to those grafted onto ‘Gisela 12’. Evaluations were carried out in three commercial orchards during three seasons in the Central Valley of Chile. The results indicated that root volume and nursery type did not affect plant survival and productivity. For ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’, only the bag treatment resulted in less trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA) and shoot length, and for ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’, the BR25 treatment showed a lower initial TCSA than other treatments, although without a negative effect on yield. Hence, the presumption about the influence of root volume and plant type on the successful establishment of a sweet cherry on ‘Colt’ and ‘Gisela 12’ rootstock can be discarded. The survival, growth and precocity of the orchard depend more on post-planting conditions and water management than on the number or type of nursery plant roots. It is important to prioritize proper post-planting care and water management for optimal orchard health.

1. Introduction

World production of sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) has increased in the last 20 years due to the increased market demand for fresh fruit. Its cultivation is widespread in countries with a Mediterranean climate [1]. Chile is the world’s main exporter of cherries, with a cultivated area of 61,000 hectares in 2022, an increase of 145% in the last five years, with nursery sales of more than 25 million trees in this period [2,3]. The rise in sweet cherry production in Chile is attributed to the harvest period, which falls in November and December, coinciding with peak demand for the fruit in China during the Chinese New Year. In the 2022 season, over 396,000 tons of fresh sweet cherries were exported [4]. Cherry plantations are being established as pedestrian orchards that produce higher and earlier yields with lower labor costs. When establishing a plantation, it is important to consider technical factors such as growing conditions, variety, rootstock, and training system [5,6]. Adequate vegetative development of trees during the formation stage and fruit production is favored by balanced mineral nutrition [7].
Planting is a crucial task in an orchard that requires proper planning to ensure success. The initial investment in a plantation is significant; therefore, homogeneous orchards with high yields will lead to more sustainable orchards over time. Planting design and plant material selection are based on the crop’s edaphoclimatic requirements and commercial interests [8].
Nursery quality is determined by trunk diameter, plant height, presence of feathers, as well as root volume and condition [9,10,11]. Additionally, the absence of pests and diseases is required. Growers typically prefer vigorous plants with a larger trunk diameter and abundant root mass to ensure survival at the time of planting. In Europe, well-branched sweet cherry trees are commonly used by growers. In North and South America, sweet cherry trees with minimal branching or no branching, also known as whip trees, are commonly used [10]. This is achieved through bud incisions and phytohormones [12,13].
Two types of nursery production systems are used for fruit trees: (i) bare root (BR) and (ii) bag (B) or container. These systems can affect tree quality, vigor, as well as the volume and distribution of the roots of each species [10,11,14,15,16]. Bare-root trees mainly consist of two-year-old trees (with or without feathers) and one-year-old maiden trees. However, bare-root plants are subject to dehydration and root and shoot damage during the removal of plant material from the nursery, transportation and planting in the field [17]. During this period, water uptake is interrupted due to root reduction and temporary loss of root–soil contact [18]. This results in low vitality because the plants are highly susceptible to water and thermal stress [19]. To minimize damage and protect the roots during transplanting, plastic containers or tree bags are used, which contain a substrate [20]. However, the substrate conditions and water availability may not be similar at the planting site. Furthermore, it is important to note that the size of the container can limit both the root volume and condition, which may result in growth defects that can negatively impact plant development [21].
The root system anchors the plant, uptakes water and nutrients from the soil, regulates aerial growth and supports the fruit load [22]. In the first year of establishment, the plant allocates most of its energy towards developing the root system and canopy for nutrient uptake and assimilation, respectively [10].
Several rootstocks are available for cherry trees that reduce tree vigor [23]. In Chile, the most commonly used rootstocks in decreasing order of vigor are: ‘Maxma 60’, ‘Colt’, ‘CAB 6-P’, ‘Gisela 12’, ‘Maxma 14’, ‘Gisela 6’ and ‘Gisela 5’ [3]. The dwarfing of the rootstock results in less aerial development, which allows for more plants per hectare and earlier yields. However, these rootstocks also produce less root development, thus increasing their sensitivity to planting conditions, which must be carefully managed [10,24,25]. Cherry growers prefer plants with a large root system, as they tend to have better survival and earlier yields than less vigorous ones. However, this has not been confirmed either experimentally or commercially.
The present study assessed the survival post-transplant, canopy growth and productivity of two sweet cherry cultivars: ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’. Trees were obtained from a nursery with two years of bare-root growth and bagged growth, which received a root volume reduction treatment prior to transplanting to three commercial orchards in the Central Valley of Chile (Figure 1).

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plant Material and Site Description

The study was carried out for 3 years (2016–2018) to evaluate growth and productivity parameters and an additional season (2019) to evaluate fruit quality in sweet cherry trees (Prunus avium L.). The cultivars evaluated were ‘Lapins’ grafted on ‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’ grafted on ‘Gisela 12’, selected from two-year-old trees from the Vivero Los Olmos nursery in Chimbarongo (Chile). The trees were planted in winter 2016 after root reduction treatments in 3 commercial orchards: (i) Graneros (Gr), (ii) San Fernando (SF) and (iii) Chimbarongo (Ch) (Table 1). Soil preparation before planting was similar for the 3 orchards. Irrigation was carried out with 2 drip lines per row and was managed according to the requirements of each cultivar.
The design of each orchard consisted of 3 randomized blocks per treatment. Each block consisted of a trial plot of 5 trees. Trees were selected on the basis of trunk height and diameter, with as much uniformity as possible.
The sites have a typical temperate Mediterranean climate, with rainy winters and dry summers. During the first season of tree establishment, there was no damage from spring frost or other climatic disturbances. The minimum temperature between bud break and full flowering was 3.5 °C in Gr compared to 7.5 °C in SF. In the seasons studied, the average air temperature during the fruit growth period (September–December) was 16 °C, with the highest heat accumulation in SF, followed by Ch and Gr (Table 2). The maximum temperature during fruit ripening differed by less than 1 °C among the sites (Table 2). The soils of the 3 orchards were loamy to sandy, fertile and well drained, with electrical conductivity between 0.23 and 0.32 (dS m−1), organic matter between 2.2% and 6.3% and pH between 6.1 and 6.6 due to their close geographical location.

2.2. Treatments

One hundred and sixty-five trees were selected according to their nursery production system: (i) bare root (BR; n = 120) and (ii) bag (B; n = 45). Bare-root trees on ‘Colt’ rootstock were identified by root pruning at different intensities: (a) BR100, no root pruning (control); (b) BR50, removal of 50% of basal roots; and (c) BR25, removal of 75%. However, plants on the ‘Gisela 12’ rootstock were only treated at BR100 and BR50 due to their lower root development. Root volume (cm3) was determined in the nursery according to the water displacement method described by Nour and Weibel [26] (Table 3). Bagged plants (5 L) were maintained with 100% of the root, and their volume could not be determined.
Thirty days after planting, plant formation pruning was performed according to the management system for the specific requirements of each orchard in bi- or multi-axis (Table 1). Plant heights were left at 1.0, 0.96 and 0.83 m in the Gr, SF and Ch orchards, respectively (Figure 2). The height of the plants remained between 3 and 4 m in the following seasons.

2.3. Evaluations

The vegetative growth of the plants was estimated at the end of each season from the trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA; cm2), canopy volume (m3) and shoot length (cm). TCSA was measured at 15 cm above the rootstock junction. Canopy volume was obtained by multiplying canopy width × depth × height. The one-year shoot length was assessed on 4 shoots per tree from the center of the canopy and from each of the cardinal points. Values were averaged to obtain the estimated mean value per tree.
Survival rates for each plot were recorded as the percentage of trees surviving two years after planting. Trees were planted in the winter of 2016.
Leaf mineral content was measured on a sample of 150 leaves per treatment, without replication, at 125 days after full bloom (DAFB) on 25 January 2019. Leaf samples were collected from the middle zone of the annual growth shoots. The minerals analyzed by the Centro Tecnológico de Suelos y Cultivos of the Universidad de Talca included N, P, K, Ca, Mg, Mn, Zn, Cu, Fe and B, according to the method of Sadzawka et al. [27]. Macronutrients were expressed as percentage of dry matter and the micronutrients as mg kg−1 of dry matter.
Fruit yield (kg tree−1) was determined from the 2018 season by harvesting the entire tree. In addition, fruit quality was assessed in the 2019 season on a sample of 50 fruits per treatment. Fresh weight (g) was measured with an analytical balance (Precisa, model 110A-300M, Wedderburn Scientific Scales, Zürich, Switzerland), and diameter (mm) was measured with a caliper at the equatorial zone of the fruit (Truper®, model CALDI-6MP, Mexico City, Mexico). Flesh firmness (g mm−1) was measured with a FirmTech II (BioWorks Inc, Wamego, KS, USA). Soluble solids content (SSC) was measured in degrees Brix (°Bx) using a PAL-1 digital refractometer (Atago, Tokyo, Japan).

2.4. Statistical Analysis

One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the differences between treatments. Data were tested for normality and homogeneity of variance using Levene’s test. Means were compared using the Tukey 95% test (p ≤ 0.05). Data analysis was performed using the Statgraphics Centurion XVI software version 16.1.03 (Warrenton, VA, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Vegetative Growth and Survival

In the first two study seasons, cv. ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ showed differences in TCSA according to nursery plant type, with BR100 trees achieving 19% and 40% more growth relative to B100 in 2016 and 2017, respectively. Regarding the effect of root volume, no significant differences were found. For ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in SF, plant type did not affect TCSA, but it did reduce the root volume, with 1.3 times less growth in the BR50 and BR25 trees compared to BR100. For ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in Ch, the TCSA was not significantly affected by the treatments (Figure 3).
Canopy volume was not significantly affected by the treatments, reaching 13, 18 and 19 m3 at the end of the 2018 season for ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ in Gr, ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in SF and ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in Ch, respectively (Figure 3).
For ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’, the nursery type influenced the shoot length at the end of the first season, with a shoot length in B100 trees six times lower than that of the bare-root trees, which was compensated in the following seasons, with no differences among treatments. For ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in Ch, the shoot length in BR50 trees was 1.4 times less than the BR25 in the 2017 season, with no significant differences in the 2018 season. For ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in SF, shoot length was not significantly affected by the treatments (Figure 3). The average shoot length in 2018 was 110, 104 and 189 cm for ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ in Gr, ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in SF and ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in Ch, respectively.
The percentage of plant survival in 2018 was 100% in almost all treatments, regardless of root volume and nursery plant type. Only ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in the SF orchard reached 93% at B100.

3.2. Foliar Mineral Content

Foliar N-P-K concentrations were not influenced by root volume and nursery plant type at planting in each orchard (Table 4). The average leaf N content was 3.3%, 2.8% and 1.9% for ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ in Gr, ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in SF and ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in Ch, respectively. For micronutrients, small differences were observed between treatments, without a clear trend between cultivars. In Gr, Cu values were 10 times higher than in other orchards. Also, Fe values in SF were 2 times higher than in Gr and 3.8 times higher than in Ch. Leaf nutrient content could not be statistically compared between treatments due to limitations in replication.

3.3. Fruit Production and Fruit Quality

Fruit yield was not affected by treatment at the first commercial harvest (2018), with an overall yield among treatments for ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ of 1.0 and 3.9 kg tree−1 in SF and Ch, respectively (Table 5). Individual tree data for ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ (Gr) were not available due to a hailstorm prior to harvest, which caused damage and fruit drop.
In the 2019 season, treatment yields were similar to those obtained at commercial harvest (trees in B100), with values of 11.6 kg tree−1 (Gr), 7.8 kg tree−1 (SF) and 14.8 kg tree−1 (Ch).
In the 2019 season, fruit quality showed differences between treatments (Table 6). For ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’, fruits of B100 showed smaller sizes and SSC than those of BR100. For ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ (SF), the fruit of B100 showed greater sizes, firmness and SSC than those with bare roots, especially with BR25. For ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ (Ch), the fruit of B100 showed small sizes but higher firmness and SSC than other treatments.

4. Discussion

All trees used in the study were terminal two-year-old trees. The ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ had an average height of 1.7 m, which allowed adequate branching in the first year. For ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’, nursery bagged trees had lower height and stem diameter than the bare-root trees (Table 3). This was initially reflected in lower TCSA and shoot length, which became equal in the 2018 season. Despite being grafted onto a less vigorous rootstock, the 50% reduction in root volume did not affect vegetative growth (Figure 3). In contrast, in ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in SF, the reduction in root volume affected TCSA, with a greater reduction in BR25 trees. The sweet cherry tree, which is a species that has evolved to exhibit rapid vegetative growth without any intervention, exhibits a tendency to form a high central axis, enabling it to establish itself competitively in the forest and then utilize its resources for fructification [19,20,21].
The training system should be chosen based on the variety, the rootstock and the growing conditions [28]. Considering that ‘Lapins’ is a self-fertile cultivar with a high productive capacity, it is not recommended to graft it on semi-dwarfing rootstock, such as ‘Gisela 12’ [29], since it would not be capable of sustaining such high fruit loads nor of maintaining a growth that would allow proper development of new fruitwood. In the case of ‘Regina’, a more dwarfing rootstock was chosen in the study due to its lower productivity potential.
The root volume reduction before transplanting bare-root trees did not affect survival or canopy volume, regardless of the percentage of pruned roots (Figure 3). The study was conducted with two-year-old nursery trees, which may have favored their better adaptation to growing conditions due to their greater vigor compared to one-year-old trees. Studies on forest species indicate that under minimal stress conditions, larger nursery trees would have a better chance of establishment opportunity than less vigorous trees, but this must be accompanied by adequate root development in relation to the aerial zone [30,31,32]. In sweet cherry, there is greater competition for assimilates and nutrients early in the season due to the short period between flowering and harvest. This species has three peaks of root growth, the first during mid-fruit development, the largest near harvest when shoot growth has stopped and the third before the leaves fall [33,34]. Root growth is highly dependent on soil conditions, such as moisture, fertility and microbiota [35,36]. Some research suggests that root pruning prior to planting would stimulate fine root development but should be complemented by adequate soil water availability [37].
Survival of bagged plants was only affected in ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ (SF), reaching 93% compared to 100% in bare-root plants. ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ (SF) plants were established in an area with a warmer environment (Table 2), which may have influenced the lower survival of the bagged plants. Several authors point out that bare-root plants have lower survival in transplanting than those in containers or bags due to higher water consumption. However, these differences are reduced under minimal stress conditions [11,14]. On the other hand, a study of one-year-old wild cherry (Prunus avium L.) seedlings reported survival of 77% in bare roots and 86% in bags, with a direct relationship between vigor and survival [6].
The planting of the three orchards was completed in winter when the demanding atmospheric conditions were low and without hydric limitations. Planting in spring might be more limiting for the survival of the plants. A review reported that the plantation would not be subjected to stress with abundant soil water and low atmospheric evaporation demand, so correct soil preparation and appropriate planting time are crucial [11].
Initial root volume and nursery plant type did not affect foliar macronutrients. Small differences in micronutrients were observed between treatments, with no clear trend between orchards (Table 4). According to Neilsen et al. [7], the nutrient levels at each site were not always optimal for sweet cherry cultivation. Typically, nitrogen (N) levels are considered normal when they fall between 1.9 and 3.0%. However, copper levels in the Ch orchard were above the optimum range of 5–20 ppm despite the cultivar being established on a more vigorous rootstock. Zinc (Zn) levels in SF were suboptimal (>15 ppm), which is concerning considering the importance of Zn in apical dominance and shoot growth. All trees in all orchards were adequately nourished, although Zn levels in SF were lower than optimal (Figure 2).
In the first harvest obtained in 2018 from the orchards SF and Ch, no significant differences in fruit yield were observed between treatments. For ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’, trees in the multi-axis showed 4 times lower fruit yield than those in the bi-axis (Table 5). In the 2019 season, the yield values obtained were 11.6 kg tree−1 (Gr), 7.8 kg tree−1 (SF) and 14.8 kg tree−1 (Ch), which are more similar to those frequently obtained from orchards in Chile. In multi-axis systems, orchard earliness is slightly more delayed than in central-axis systems due to the longer time needed to form permanent tree structures [28], which was reflected in the low yield of ‘Lapins’/’Colt’ in SF.
In the second commercial harvest, fruit quality showed minimal differences between treatments, both in size and organoleptic characteristics (Table 5). The average size was 26–27 mm, which is considered an intermediate commercial size (Jumbo category), although this was independent of the treatment.
The cost of planting material represents about 30% of the cost of planting a sweet cherry orchard in Chile (for 1250 trees ha−1), which can increase even more in those orchards that seek greater earliness with high planting densities (2000–3500 trees ha−1). Bare-root two-year-old trees are priced USD 2 higher than bagged plants despite minimal differences in tree behavior after transplanting. This should be considered when planning new orchard planting.
The present study refutes what growers have historically demanded from nursery producers, i.e., trees with large root development, along with a certain diameter and height. It was suggested that planting conditions and water supply could be more decisive for the survival, growth and precocity of established orchards than root volume or nursery plant type. This could be considered for future studies comparing different levels of water supply and root volume. Further research should focus on the physiological performance of the trees after planting.

5. Conclusions

According to the results obtained in the study, after three evaluation seasons, root volume and nursery plant type did not affect sweet cherry survival. Sweet cherry survival reached 100% in plants with 100%, 50% and 25% bare root at planting, while plants in bags had an average survival rate of 98% among cultivars. By the end of the third season, vegetative growth in terms of TCSA, canopy volume and shoot length were equalized among treatments, with no differences in fruit yield between ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’. Similarly, leaf nutrient concentrations were not influenced by root volume or nursery plant type at planting. In summary, the results indicated that root volume and nursery type did not affect the survival and productivity of cherry orchards.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.A.Y., D.S., M.F. and Á.S.; methodology, D.S. and M.F.; software, D.S.; validation, J.S.-C., M.P. and M.M.; formal analysis, J.A.Y., J.S.-C., Á.S., M.P. and M.M.; investigation, J.A.Y., Á.S., D.S., M.F., J.S.-C., M.P. and M.M.; resources, J.S.-C., M.P. and M.M.; data curation, J.S.-C. and M.P.; writing—original draft preparation, J.A.Y., J.S.-C., M.P., M.M., D.S., M.F. and Á.S.; writing—review and editing, J.S.-C. and M.M.; visualization, J.S.-C., M.P. and M.M.; supervision, J.A.Y. and J.S.-C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Los Olmos Nursery and the agribusinesses Capac SpA, Agrícola Furore Ltd. and Agrícola Antumapu Ltd.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Bujdosó, G.; Hrotkó, K. Cherry production. In Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses; Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Puławska, J., Lang, G., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, UK, 2017; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar]
  2. CIREN-ODEPA Estadísticas Productivas. Available online: https://www.odepa.gob.cl/estadisticas-del-sector/estadisticas-productivas (accessed on 20 February 2023).
  3. AGV Anuario de Viveros 2022. Available online: https://viverosdechile.cl/anuario-agv/ (accessed on 20 February 2023).
  4. ODEPA Comercio Exterior. Available online: https://www.odepa.gob.cl/estadisticas-del-sector/comercio-exterior (accessed on 20 February 2023).
  5. Grossnickle, S.C. Importance of root growth in overcoming planting stress. New For. 2005, 30, 273–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Esen, D.; Yildiz, O.; Esen, U.; Edis, S.; Cetintas, C. Effects of cultural treatments, seedling type and morphological characteristics on survival and growth of wild cherry seedlings in Turkey. Iforest-Biogeosci. For. 2012, 5, 283–289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Neilsen, G.H.; Neilsen, D.; Forge, T. Environmental Limiting Factors for Cherry Production. In Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses; Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Putawska, J., Lang, G., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Boston, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 189–222. [Google Scholar]
  8. Koumanov, K.S.; Long, L.E. Site preparation and orchard infrastructure. In Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses; Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Pulawska, J., Lang, G., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Boston, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 223–243. [Google Scholar]
  9. Robinson, T.L. Recent advances and future directions in orchard planting systems. Acta Hortic. 2007, 732, 367–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Ayala, M.; Lang, G.A. Morphology, Cropping Physiology and Canopy Training. In Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses; Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Pulawska, J., Lang, G.A., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Boston, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 269–304. [Google Scholar]
  11. Grossnickle, S.C.; El-Kassaby, Y.A. Bareroot versus container stocktypes: A performance comparison. New For. 2016, 47, 1–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Hrotkó, K.; Magyar, L.; Simon, G.; Gyeviki, M. Development in intensive orchard systems of cherries in Hungary. Int. J. Hortic. Sci. 2007, 13, 76–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Neri, D.; Mazzoni, M.; Zucconi, F.; Dradi, G. Feathering control in sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) nursery, by deblading and cytokinin. Acta Hortic. 2004, 636, 119–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hochmuth, G.; Cantliffe, D.; Chandler, C.; Stanley, C.; Bish, E.; Waldo, E.; Legard, D.; Duval, J. Containerized Strawberry Transplants Reduce Establishment-Period Water Use and Enhance Early Growth and Flowering Compared with Bare-Root Plants. HortTechnology 2006, 16, 46–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Levinsson, A. Post-transplant shoot growth of trees from five different production methods is affected by site and species. Arboricult. Urban 2013, 39, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Watson, G.W.; Hewitt, A.M. Development of Root Architecture in Thirty-seven Tree Species of Field Grown Nursery Stock1. J. Environ. Hortic. 2020, 38, 143–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. McKay, H.M. A review of the effect of stresses between lifting and planting on nursery stock quality and performance. New For. 1997, 13, 369–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Burdett, A.N. Physiological processes in plantation establishment and the development of specifications for forest planting stock. Can. J. For. Res. 1990, 20, 415–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Rietveld, W.J. Transplanting Stress in Bareroot Conifer Seedlings: Its Development and Progression to Establishment. N. J. Appl. For. 1989, 6, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Allen, K.S.; Harper, R.W.; Bayer, A.; Brazee, N.J. A review of nursery production systems and their influence on urban tree survival. Urban For. Urban Green. 2017, 21, 183–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Amoroso, G.; Frangi, P.; Piatti, R.; Ferrini, F.; Fini, A.; Faoro, M. Effect of Container Design on Plant Growth and Root Deformation of Littleleaf Linden and Field Elm. HortScience 2010, 45, 1824–1829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Jakab-Ilyefalvi, Z. Root system distribution of sweet cherry trees grafted on vigorous rootstock in molic eutricambosoil in Northern Transylvania. Bull. Univ. Agric. Sci. Vet. Med. Cluj-Napoca. Hortic. 2021, 78, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Lang, G.A. Precocious, Dwarfing, and Productive—How Will New Cherry Rootstocks Impact the Sweet Cherry Industry? HortTechnology 2000, 10, 719–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Long, L.E.; Iezzoni, A.; Seavert, C.; Auvil, T.; Kaiser, C.; Brewer, L.J. New cherry rootstock and cultivar interactions directly affect orchard profitability. Acta Hortic. 2019, 1235, 197–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Morandi, B.; Manfrini, L.; Lugli, S.; Tugnoli, A.; Boini, A.; Perulli, G.D.; Bresilla, K.; Venturi, M.; Corelli Grappadelli, L. Sweet cherry water relations and fruit production efficiency are affected by rootstock vigor. J. Plant Physiol. 2019, 237, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Nour, A.E.M.; Weibel, D.L. Evaluation of root characteristics in grain sorghum. Agron. J. 1978, 70, 217–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Sadzawka, R.A.; Carrasco, R.M.A.; Demanet, F.R.; Flores, P.H.; Grez, Z.R.; Mora, G.M.d.l.L.; Neaman, A. Métodos de Análisis de Tejidos Vegetales. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14001/8570 (accessed on 20 February 2023).
  28. Long, L.; Lang, S.; Musacchi, S.; Whiting, M. PNW 667: Cherry Training Systems; Pacific Northwest Extension Publication: Moscow, ID, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hrotkó, K.; Rozpara, E. Rootstocks and Improvement. In Cherries: Botany, Production and Uses; Quero-García, J., Iezzoni, A., Putawska, J., Lang, G., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Boston, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 117–139. [Google Scholar]
  30. Symeonidou, M.V.; Buckley, G.P. The effect of pre-planting desiccation stress and root pruning on the physiological condition and subsequent field performance of one year old Prunus avium and P. cerasifera seedlings. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 1999, 74, 386–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Rytter, L.; Ericsson, T.; Rytter, R. Effects of Demand-driven Fertilization on Nutrient Use, Root:Plant Ratio and Field Performance of Betula pendula and Picea abies. Scand. J. For. Res. 2003, 18, 401–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kupka, I. The root-plant ratio changes in the first growing periods of wild cherry (Prunus avium L.) plantations. J. For. Sci. 2007, 53, 113–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bonomelli, C.; Bonilla, C.A.; Acuña, E.; Vargas, P.A. Seasonal pattern of root growth in relation to shoot phenology and soil temperature in sweet cherry trees (Prunus avium): A preliminary study in central Chile. Cienc. E Investig. Agrar. Rev. Latinoam. De Cienc. De La Agric. 2012, 39, 127–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Baddeley, J.A.; Watson, C.A. Seasonal patterns of fine-root production and mortality in Prunus avium in Scotland. Can. J. For. Res. 2004, 34, 1534–1537. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Munro, P.; Forge, T.A.; Jones, M.D.; Nelson, L.M. Soil biota from newly established orchards are more beneficial to early growth of cherry trees than biota from older orchards. Appl. Soil Ecol. 2020, 155, 103658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Franco, J.A.; Bañón, S.; Vicente, M.J.; Miralles, J.; Martínez-Sánchez, J.J. Root development in horticultural plants grown under abiotic stress conditions—A review. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotechnol. 2011, 86, 543–556. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Levinsson, A.; Sæbø, A.; Fransson, A.-M. Influence of nursery production system on water status in transplanted trees. Sci. Hortic. 2014, 178, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Horticulturae 10 00579 g001
Figure 1. Initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) in bare root (BR) and 100% in bags (B) on ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ prior to planting in Chimbarongo, Chile.
Figure 1. Initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) in bare root (BR) and 100% in bags (B) on ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ prior to planting in Chimbarongo, Chile.
Horticulturae 10 00579 g001
Horticulturae 10 00579 g002
Figure 2. Row 1 shows the training pruning that was carried out in 2016 after 30 d of planting to form the plants in bi-axis (A: ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ in Graneros; C: ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in Chimbarongo) and multi-axis (B: ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in San Fernando). Row 2 shows the vegetative evolution until the 2018 season.
Figure 2. Row 1 shows the training pruning that was carried out in 2016 after 30 d of planting to form the plants in bi-axis (A: ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ in Graneros; C: ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in Chimbarongo) and multi-axis (B: ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ in San Fernando). Row 2 shows the vegetative evolution until the 2018 season.
Horticulturae 10 00579 g002
Horticulturae 10 00579 g003
Figure 3. Trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA), canopy volume and shoot length at the end of each season in sweet cherry trees in Graneros (‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’), San Fernando (‘Lapins’/‘Colt’) and Chimbarongo (‘Lapins’/‘Colt’) according to initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; and bag: B). Values are mean + standard error (n = 15 plants per treatment). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments according to Tukey test (p ≤ 0.05).
Figure 3. Trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA), canopy volume and shoot length at the end of each season in sweet cherry trees in Graneros (‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’), San Fernando (‘Lapins’/‘Colt’) and Chimbarongo (‘Lapins’/‘Colt’) according to initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; and bag: B). Values are mean + standard error (n = 15 plants per treatment). Different letters indicate significant differences between treatments according to Tukey test (p ≤ 0.05).
Horticulturae 10 00579 g003
Table 1. Background on growing sweet cherry in three commercial orchards, Chile.
Table 1. Background on growing sweet cherry in three commercial orchards, Chile.
LocationLatitudeLongitudeCultivarTraining SystemTree Spacing
(m)		Planting Density
(trees ha−1)
Graneros34°03′ S70°42′ W‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’bi-axis4.0 × 2.01250
San Fernando34°34′ S70°56′ W‘Lapins’/‘Colt’multi-axis3.5 × 2.01428
Chimbarongo34°42′ S71°00′ W‘Lapins’/‘Colt’bi-axis4.5 × 2.25988
Table 2. Air temperature (°C) and heat units (GDD10) * for each location according to season (from 1 September to 31 December), Chile.
Table 2. Air temperature (°C) and heat units (GDD10) * for each location according to season (from 1 September to 31 December), Chile.
SeasonGraneros San Fernando Chimbarongo
TemperatureGDDTemperatureGDDTemperatureGDD
MeanMax.Min.MeanMax.Min.MeanMax.Min.
201616.124.57.574517.024.610.689415.723.29.3768
201714.022.36.061716.323.110.380515.222.19.1697
201814.822.96.769415.922.99.976715.522.79.2729
* Heat units [growing degree-days (GDD)] were calculated hourly for each location with 10 °C as the threshold temperature [11].
Table 3. Root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%), plant height and stem diameter of sweet cherry trees at planting in 2016 with different nursery production systems (bare root (BR) and bag (B)) by root pruning at different intensities in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
Table 3. Root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%), plant height and stem diameter of sweet cherry trees at planting in 2016 with different nursery production systems (bare root (BR) and bag (B)) by root pruning at different intensities in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
Treatment‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’
Graneros		‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
San Fernando		‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
Chimbarongo
Root
Volume		Plant HeightStem
Diameter		Root
Volume		Plant
Height		Stem
Diameter		Root
Volume		Plant
Height		Stem
Diameter
(cm3)(m)(mm)(cm3)(m)(mm)(cm3)(m)(mm)
BR100197 a1.70 a16 a401 a1.75 a18 a410 a1.74 a19 a
BR50104 b1.72 a16 a206 b1.74 a16 a205 b1.74 a15 b
BR25n.a.n.an.a105 c1.74 a16 a100 c1.74 a18 a
B100n.a.1.44 b12 bn.a.1.67 b15 an.a.1.70 a15 b
Significant differences according to Tukey test (p ≤ 0.05) among treatments for each orchard are indicated by different letters. n.a. = not applicable. (n = 15 plants per treatment). Data and statistical analysis from Los Olmos Nursery.
Table 4. Foliar mineralogical concentration in sweet cherry trees at 125 DAFB according to root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; bag: B) for the 2018 season in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
Table 4. Foliar mineralogical concentration in sweet cherry trees at 125 DAFB according to root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; bag: B) for the 2018 season in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
Cultivar
Location		TreatmentNPKCaMgMnZnCuFeB
‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’
Graneros		BR1003.40.212.41.00.31104359916577
BR503.30.202.51.00.31106287625283
B1003.30.202.51.00.31103349913777
‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
San Fernado		BR1003.10.191.42.00.43194131033088
BR502.80.201.31.90.43118151035190
BR252.70.211.72.00.42135131149193
B1002.70.211.52.10.3911113936884
‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
Chimbarongo		BR1001.80.261.61.60.486944710486
BR501.90.251.51.80.527645710892
BR252.00.241.41.70.46714579490
B1002.00.251.51.80.52774269788
Values for N, P, K, Ca and Mg values are expressed as percent dry matter; values for Mn, Zn, Cu, Fe and B are expressed as mg kg−1 dry matter. N values were determined by Kjeldahl method.
Table 5. Fruit yield (kg tree−1) of sweet cherry trees according to initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; bag: B) in the 2018 season in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
Table 5. Fruit yield (kg tree−1) of sweet cherry trees according to initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; bag: B) in the 2018 season in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
Treatment‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’
Graneros		‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
San Fernando		‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
Chimbarongo
BR100n.d.1.2 a4.6 a
BR50n.d.1.0 a3.1 a
BR25n.d.0.8 a3.3 a
B100n.d.1.1 a4.5 a
Different letters between treatments indicate significant differences according to Tukey test (p ≤ 0.05). n.d. = not detected. (n = 15 plants per treatment).
Table 6. Fruit quality of sweet cherries according to initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; bag: B) in the 2019 season in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
Table 6. Fruit quality of sweet cherries according to initial root volume reduction (BR100: 0; BR50: 50% and BR25: 75%) and nursery plant type (bare root: BR; bag: B) in the 2019 season in Chilean orchards located in Graneros, San Fernando and Chimbarongo.
‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’
Graneros		‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
San Fernando		‘Lapins’/‘Colt’
Chimbarongo
TreatmentWeight
(g)		Diameter
(mm)		Firmness
(g mm−1)		SSC
(°Bx)		Weight
(g)		Diameter
(mm)		Firmness
(g mm−1)		SSC
(°Bx)		Weight
(g)		Diameter
(mm)		Firmness
(g mm−1)		SSC
(°Bx)
BR10010.1 a27.0 a273 a22.2 a10.6 b26.7 b267 ab22.5 ab9.8 b25.4 b468 a19.3 a
BR509.5 b26.0 b226 b22.7 a10.7 b26.5 b271 ab22.5 ab10.6 a25.8 b302 c17.2 b
BR25n.a.n.a.n.a.n.a.10.0 b26.0 b248 b21.5 b8.8 c26.1 b327 b16.8 b
B1009.2 b25.4 b266 a19.7 b11.6 a27.9 a274 a23.3 a10.4 ab27.4 a291 c16.7 b
Different letters between treatments indicate significant differences according to Tukey test (p ≤ 0.05). n.a. = not applicable. SSC (soluble solids content). (n = 50 fruits per treatment).
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

Yuri, J.A.; Simeone, D.; Fuentes, M.; Sepúlveda, Á.; Palma, M.; Moya, M.; Sánchez-Contreras, J. Reduced Root Volume at Establishment, Canopy Growth and Fruit Production in ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ Sweet Cherry Trees. Horticulturae 2024, 10, 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae10060579

AMA Style

Yuri JA, Simeone D, Fuentes M, Sepúlveda Á, Palma M, Moya M, Sánchez-Contreras J. Reduced Root Volume at Establishment, Canopy Growth and Fruit Production in ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ Sweet Cherry Trees. Horticulturae. 2024; 10(6):579. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae10060579

Chicago/Turabian Style

Yuri, José Antonio, Daniela Simeone, Mauricio Fuentes, Álvaro Sepúlveda, Miguel Palma, Mariana Moya, and Javier Sánchez-Contreras. 2024. "Reduced Root Volume at Establishment, Canopy Growth and Fruit Production in ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ Sweet Cherry Trees" Horticulturae 10, no. 6: 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae10060579

APA Style

Yuri, J. A., Simeone, D., Fuentes, M., Sepúlveda, Á., Palma, M., Moya, M., & Sánchez-Contreras, J. (2024). Reduced Root Volume at Establishment, Canopy Growth and Fruit Production in ‘Lapins’/‘Colt’ and ‘Regina’/‘Gisela 12’ Sweet Cherry Trees. Horticulturae, 10(6), 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae10060579

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