1. Introduction
Demographic shifts around the world have created increasingly diverse communities, bringing together people with a wide range of ethnic backgrounds and taste preferences. This diversity has increased demand for peaches and nectarines with varied skin and flesh colors and flavor profiles. Commercial nurseries now offer more peach and nectarine cultivars than any other deciduous fruit species, largely because these crops exhibit extensive genetic variability, strong consumer interest, and active breeding programs that continually introduce new selections. Nectarines and peaches can be grown in a wide variety of climates, elevations, chilling requirements, and growing degree days from 1 January through bloom and harvest. Several new peach and nectarine varieties have been introduced to the market through relatively well-established traditional and new molecular breeding technologies [
1,
2,
3,
4].
Knowledge of chilling requirements and careful selection of orchard site, elevation, cultivar, rootstock, irrigation system, and proper nutrition are paramount in establishing a peach and nectarine orchard [
2,
5,
6,
7,
8]. According to Marini et al. [
9], peaches that require fewer than 800 h of chilling often bloom early and are susceptible to early-spring frosts. They also reported that peaches grown at lower elevations may ripen 3 to 20 days earlier than those grown at about 670 m above sea level. Braxton et al. [
10] recommended planting ‘Scarletprince’, ‘Red Globe’, ‘Loring’, ‘White River’, ‘Contender’, ‘Julyprince’, ‘Whiterock’, ‘Crest Haven’, ‘White Diamond’, ‘Flameprince’, and ‘Carolina Gold’, which have chilling requirements ranging between 750 and nearly 1000 h in Arkansas. They also recommended planting cultivars in central and northern Arkansas that require more than 1000 chilling hours. Furthermore, they recommend avoiding planting varieties with less than 750 chilling hours in Arkansas due to the high chance of frost injury during bloom. The effect of temperature on peach floral bud cold hardiness and the relationships between chilling hours and the likelihood of freeze damage are described for peach- and nectarine-growing regions in Colorado [
11] and Illinois [
12,
13].
Rouse and Sherman [
14] reported that several low-chill peach cultivars in the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas had higher skin blushes than in Gainesville, FL, and attributed the increased blush coverage to the warmer prevailing temperatures in Texas. In a similar study across different regions of Florida, Wert et al. [
15], using four cultivars (’Flordaprince’, ‘Flordaglo’, ‘UFGold’, and ‘TropicBeauty’), observed that peaches grown in the warmer region of the southwest had higher fruit color and soluble solids concentrations (SSC) but a lower fruit development period (FDP) than the north central location, due to higher temperature during early stages of cell development and enlargement in the southwest location. Furthermore, other researchers reported that temperatures during the early stages of peach fruit development affected the FDP [
16]. Topp and Sherman [
17] reported that a 1 °C reduction in mean temperature over the entire FDP can result in a 5-day increase in FDP. In another study, Boonprakob et al. [
18] indicated that using the average daily temperature 30 to 45 days after full bloom was a good predictor of FDP length and found a 2- to 6-day reduction in FDP for every 1 °C increase in mean temperature, depending on the cultivar. Contrary to these reports, Topp and Sherman [
19] did not observe any association between temperature and red blush of peaches across 13 production regions in Australia.
The fruit of the peach and nectarine is climacteric, soft-fleshed, and highly perishable. Therefore, it is crucial to harvest these fruits at optimal maturity to ensure they are of the highest quality, so they can be stored and shipped over long distances with minimal or no bruising. Harvesting peaches and nectarines either too early or too late creates obstacles for transportation, storage, and customer preferences. In early harvests, peaches do not complete the climacteric evolution during storage, resulting in poor organoleptic quality and consumer complaints [
20]. Also, immature fruits are more susceptible to dehydration and internal damage [
21]. On the other hand, in late harvests, fruits are less firm and more susceptible to mealiness [
22,
23,
24]. Velardo-Micharet et al. [
25] studied the impact of two harvest stages and several storage conditions in three peach cultivars, and recommended harvesting ‘Summer Lady’ peaches later than their traditional commercial harvest, as this delay improved sensory quality without losing storability. In their study, ‘Summer Lady’ was ranked as the best, and ‘Merryl O’Henry’ was rated the worst, due to its lack of ripening and high incidence of chilling injury. Some pre- and post-harvest factors may impact storage life and fruit quality in peaches and nectarines. For example, cultivars, storage time, fruit size, and crop load [
26,
27], as well as variations in storage temperatures within the range of 2.2 to 7.6 °C, favor the development of physiological disorders known as chilling injuries [
28].
Sufficient pilot research in adaptability, phenology, and the quality performance of various peach cultivars should be conducted in each region before planting peaches on a large commercial scale [
29,
30,
31,
32,
33]. Societies’ demographics are diversifying rapidly, with people from diverse ethnic backgrounds and preferences. The introduction of these new cultivars offers a range of peach and nectarine options with different fruit skin and flesh colors and flavors [
34]. With the introduction of white-fleshed peaches and nectarines, several researchers have focused on comparing fruit production and quality attributes of white-fleshed fruits with each other and with those of yellow-fleshed fruit. Frecon et al. [
35] compared the peach and nectarines developed in New Jersey with some white-fleshed cultivars from other locations, and found that ‘Carolina Belle’, ‘Klondike’, ‘Blushing Star’, ‘Sugar Giant’, ‘Snow Giant’, and ‘Arctic Jay’ showed promise for planting in New Jersey. Crisosto et al. [
36] reported high variability in titratable acidity (TA), SSC, bruising, flesh browning susceptibility, and market life among several white-fleshed peach and nectarine cultivars in the San Joaquin Valley of California. Following harvest, SSC did not increase, nor did TA decrease; thus, the SSC/TA remained the same in these stone fruits [
36]. Iglesias and Echeverria [
24], studying the impact of harvest time in six nectarine cultivars, reported that sub-acid cultivars consistently exhibited a more intense red skin color than acid cultivars and developed red coloration earlier in the growing season. In that study, acid cultivars showed a significantly faster decrease in fruit firmness, especially evident in the case of early-season cultivars such as ‘Alice’. The consumer acceptance was always greater for non-acid than for acid cultivars, even at early or advanced stages of fruit maturity. Fallahi et al. [
29], in an extensive study with 34 yellow and white-fleshed peaches, categorized ‘Snow Giant’, ‘Jupiter’, ‘Yukan King’, ‘Burpeach Six’, ‘Fairtime’, ‘Coral Star’, ‘July Sun’, and ‘Zee Lady’ as early-bloom peaches and ‘Sierra Gem’, ‘Fancy Lady’, and ‘Red Star’ as late-bloom peaches. In another experiment, Fallahi et al. [
30] assessed several yellow-and white-fleshed nectarines and found ‘Arctic Jay’, ‘Fantasia’, ‘Honey Kist’, and ‘Arctic Pride’ bloomed earlier, while ‘Arctic Mist’, A28.082, and ‘Summer Fire’ bloomed later than other cultivars. Fallahi et al. [
31] compared 11 yellow-fleshed nectarines under the high desert conditions of southwest Idaho in the Intermountain West regions of the United States and revealed that ‘Diamond June’ and ‘Honey Kist’ were the earliest cultivars to harvest and needed 110 and 114 days between full bloom and harvest, respectively. On average, ‘Sparkling Red’ and ‘A28.082’ were harvested after the second half of September.
Peaches and nectarines have been grown commercially in Southwest Idaho since 1870 [
37]. The best orchard sites are taken for development and urbanization in Idaho. Nevertheless, peaches accounted for 18% of Idaho’s total tree fruit production in 2022, and that year, there were 166 peach and nectarine orchards in Idaho, an 11% increase from 2017 [
38]. This increase in production is due to our introduction of several new cultivars for the region [
29,
30,
31] and to warm, dry days and cool nights during the growing season and at fruit maturity, which create conditions suitable for growing high-quality nectarines and peaches in this region.
In light of the increasing commercial importance and demographic changes, demand for both yellow and white nectarines [
29,
30,
36], and a reduction in production in California, our goal was to study growing degree-days, bloom and harvest dates, yield, and fruit quality attributes (including split pit and fruit-finish attributes such as russet intensity) of several cultivars of yellow- and white-fleshed nectarines, harvested at two stages (Harvest 1 and Harvest 2) and stored for two storage periods (Period 1 and Period 2), to recommend suitable strategies under conditions of southwest Idaho over 4 years.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Experimental Orchard, Cultural Practices, and Phenology
The experimental orchard was located at the University of Idaho Pomology and Viticulture Program at the Parma Research and Extension Center in Parma, ID. This orchard was a representative area of fruit-producing orchards in the United States Intermountain West region, with a latitude of 43°48′00″ N, longitude 116°56′00″ W, at an elevation of 703 m, with an average annual precipitation of 274 mm, an average minimum daily temperature of about −5 to −8 °C in January, and an average maximum daily temperature of about 33 to 34.3 °C in July during the period of 1981 and 2020.
Uniform nectarine trees on ‘Nemaguard’ rootstock, averaging 1.27 cm in trunk diameter measured 30 cm above the bud union, were used in this study. An initial screening was conducted on phenological, yield, and quality attributes in 21 nectarine cultivars between 2011 and 2015. Based on these initial assessments, six cultivars were selected for further detailed evaluations during 2016–2019. Trees in this study were obtained from two nurseries as follows: ‘Giant Pearl’, ‘Majestic Pearl’, ‘Candy Pearl’, and ‘Royal Bright’ from Bradford Farm Nursery, California, and ‘Burnectseven’ (‘BN-7’ or ‘C7.053’) and ‘Flame’ from The Burchell Nursery, Inc., California.
Trees were planted at 2.44 × 4.88 m spacing on 4 April 2007. Trees were trained into a four-leader vase-shaped system. Trees were also pruned during the summer to facilitate light penetration through the canopy. The soil was sandy loam and at the depth of 0 to 61 cm, and the soil characteristics were as follows: pH 7.1 to 7.3, nitrate nitrogen (NO3-N) 2.74 to 3.14 μg·g−1, ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N) 1.45 to 1.09 μg·g−1, phosphorous (P) 8.0 to 12.4 μg·g−1, potassium (K) 306 to 319 μg·g−1, cation exchange capacity (CEC) 0.166 to 0.183 meq·g−1, and organic matter 0.48% to 1.03%.
One mm drip line (Rain Bird Corporation, Azusa, CA, USA) was installed in a 10-cm trench (subsurface) 40.6 cm away from and parallel to the tree row on both east and west sides of the tree row. The irrigation system was connected to a pressure regulator to maintain a constant water pressure of 3.52 kg·cm
−2. Pressure-compensating emitters were spaced at 45.7 cm on each line, and each emitter delivered 3.48 L/h of water. Trees in this system were irrigated twice per week at 100% of the daily crop evapotranspiration (ETc) for peaches and nectarines, as described for different crops by Allen et al. [
39] and for apples (
Malus domestica Borkh.) by Fallahi et al. [
40]. We used data from the Agrimet Weather Station at the University of Idaho in Parma, ID, to calculate ETc.
Urea nitrogen [CO(NH
2)
2] mixed with potassium chloride (KCl) and P was applied annually in May via fertigation to provide N, P, and K at rates of 123, 56, and 67 kg·ha
−1, respectively. Micronutrients, particularly iron (Fe) and zinc (Zn), were sprayed twice each year in spring and once in early summer. Crested wheatgrass [
Agropyron cristatum (L.) Gaertn.], a drought-tolerant grass, was planted as the orchard floor cover in all treatments. General cultural practices in this experiment were similar to those used in commercial orchards in the region [
41].
Dates of full bloom (about 80% of blossoms open) and commercial harvest (when most of the fruit were ready to be harvested) for each tree were recorded every year from 2016 to 2019.
Total chilling hours, defined as the number of hours during winter when temperatures ranged between 0 and 7 °C, were calculated using data from the Agrimet Weather Station in Parma, Idaho. Estimated chilling hours were approximately 1200–1500 h in winter 2015–2016, 1200–1400 h in winter 2016–2017, 1000–1200 h in winter 2017–2018, and 1300–1450 h in winter 2018–2019.
For phenological analyses, both the calendar dates and the corresponding Julian Day Numbers (JDNs) for full bloom, Harvest 1, and Harvest 2 were calculated, with JDNs assigned sequentially beginning on 1 January of each year. Daily growing degree-days (DGDD) from 1 January to full bloom and to the harvest time dates were calculated as follows: [(daily maximum plus minimum temperatures °C)/2 − (10 °C)]. Cumulative growing degree-days (GDD) were calculated as the sum of daily GDD from 1 January to full bloom and to each harvest date for each cultivar in each year, using data from the Agrimet Weather Station in Parma, Idaho. The percentage increase in GDD at Harvest 2 relative to Harvest 1 (H2H1Dif) was computed as the 4-year average of annual values, where each year’s percentage was calculated as follows: [(GDD at Harvest 2 − GDD at Harvest 1)/GDD at Harvest 1] × 100.
Fruit thinning was performed manually each year when the fruit diameter reached approximately 2–2.5 cm. At this stage, crop load was adjusted by removing excess fruit to maintain an approximate spacing of 20 cm between adjacent fruits along each fruiting branch.
2.2. Harvest and Storage Intervals and Fruit Collection
Fruit was harvested at two harvest times, referred to as Harvest 1 and Harvest 2, throughout this report. The time for Harvest 1 was decided when the following signs could be observed in each cultivar:
The size and color of the fruits were visually developed, and the last trace of the green background was blended into a creamy yellow or bright red color.
The flesh was quite firm when squeezed. To ensure consistency in the stage of firmness at harvest, 2–3 fruits per tree were sampled and used as a “side test” to evaluate firmness. When fruit firmness reached approximately 30–50 N, depending on the cultivar and our prior experience with its ripening behavior, and when external color criteria were also met, fruit were picked for Harvest 1. At that stage, the fruit was edible but not as pleasant as a juicy, ready-to-eat fruit.
Harvest 2 for each cultivar occurred a few days after Harvest 1, when “side-test” firmness had declined to approximately 25–45 N, fruit color was fully developed, and the flesh remained sufficiently firm for harvesting and handling but could be compressed with firm thumb pressure.
At each harvest (Harvest 1 and Harvest 2), 24 fruits per tree (replication) were randomly picked and placed into three perforated plastic trays for fresh nectarines, each with an 8-fruit capacity, and then packed into 11.3-kg cardboard boxes. Fruit was transported to the University of Idaho Pomology and Viticulture Program laboratory and placed for immediate precooling. Fruits from Harvest 1 and Harvest 2 were evaluated for quality attributes at harvest and after holding at 0 °C, in a regular atmosphere for 2 weeks (Period 1) and 4 weeks (Period 2). Eight fruits per box were used for quality assessments at each harvest time and after storage periods 1 and 2.
2.3. Fruit Quality Assessment
Total yield per tree was measured by adding the weight of subsamples at Harvest 1 and Harvest 2 to the weight of the remaining fruit on the tree each year. Fruit weight was measured at each harvest time and after each storage period. The percentage of weight loss (water loss) was calculated by weighing the fruit before and after storage. The percentage increase in fruit weight at Harvest 2 relative to Harvest 1 (IWH12%) was calculated as the 4-year average of annual percentage increases, where each year’s value was computed as follows: [(Fruit weight at Harvest 2 − Fruit weight at Harvest 1)/Fruit weight at Harvest 1] × 100.
Fruit firmness was measured on two peeled sides of each fruit with a fruit texture analyzer (Guss; Strand, Western Cape, South Africa) that measured the force needed to puncture a 5-millimeter-deep hole on each of the two peeled sides of the fruit using an 8 mm tip. The percentage reduction in fruit firmness at Harvest 2 relative to Harvest 1 (PFRH1H2) was calculated as the 4-year average of annual percentage reductions, where each year’s value was computed as follows: [(Fruit firmness at Harvest 1 − Fruit firmness at Harvest 2)/Fruit firmness at Harvest 1] × 100.
Fruit soluble solids concentration (SSC) was measured using a hand-held temperature-compensated refractometer (N1; Atago, Tokyo, Japan). Fruit skin and flesh color were inspected visually and described. Fruit from each cultivar was evaluated by several people, and the flavor was objectively described. Fruit maturity at each evaluation was also assessed using the DA-Meter (Sinteleia, S.r.L., Bologna, Italy), which operates on the absorbance of chlorophyll (index of absorbance difference (IAD) in 2019.
Sensory attributes were evaluated for each cultivar by a four-member panel (two males and two females). Flavor, texture, sweetness, and aroma were rated objectively on a 1–10 scale, where 1 = extremely disliked and 10 = most liked.
2.4. Experimental Design
The experimental design was a completely randomized design factorial arrangement with six nectarine cultivars, two harvest stages, two storage periods, and six single-tree replications. Data were analyzed using general linear model (GLM) procedures. Fisher’s protected Least Significant Difference (LSD) at α = 0.05 was used to separate treatment means. Statistical analyses were carried out using SAS (version 9.2; SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).