Apple I Tuesday Afternoon 2:00 Pm

Great Lakes Fruit, Vegetable & Farm Market EXPO Michigan Greenhouse Growers EXPO December 9 - 11, 2014

DeVos Place Convention Center, Grand Rapids, MI

Apple I Tuesday afternoon 2:00 pm

Where: Ballroom D

MI Recertification credits: 2 (1C, COMM CORE, PRIV CORE) CCA Credits: CM(2.0)

Moderator: Brett Anderson, MSHS Board, Sparta, MI

2:00 pm Apple Production in Italy - 2014 IFTA Study Tour

 Amy Irish-Brown, Tree Fruit IPM Educator, MSU Extension, Grand Rapids, MI  Phil Schwallier, District Horticulture and Marketing Educator, MSU Extension, Clarksville, MI 2:35 pm Michigan Tree Fruit Commission Update

 Jim Engelsma, Engelsma's Apple Barn, Grand Rapids, MI 2:50 pm Compare and Contrast Apple Orchard Management Trends in Italy and Washington State

 Stefano Musacchi, Horticulture Dept., Washington State Univ. 3:25 pm Precision Apple Production – What Are You Leaving on the Table

 Rod Farrow, Lamont Fruit Farm, Waterport, NY 4:00 pm Session Ends

Italy and Washington State

Compare and Contrast Apple Orchard Management Distance: 8.818,75 km 5,481 miles Trends in Italy and Washington State

Stefano Musacchi WSU-TFREC, Wenatchee, WA

Typical production & market value of apple in the Pacific Northwest USA

5 cultivars account for 3467 tons 68% Region Productionctio Valuelue (1000 MT) ($M) Washington 2900 2000 APPLE Oregon 90 50 USA 4500 1000

Prognosfruit 2014 Prognosfruit 2014 © 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi Washington apple production % by cultivar (2012) WA apple acreage by variety Honeycrisp in Washington 1986-2011 • 1999 first plantings • Now top three • Currently >10,000 acres • 2008/09 1.8 M boxes • 2012/13 >5 M boxes • 10% of crop in storage March 1

USDA – NASS

Others cultivars Recent U.S apple releases Apple production areas in Italy • Jazz NY2 • Pacific Rose RubyFrost • Ambrosia NY1 • Lady Alice SnapDragon • Sonya • Aurora • ...Red-fleshed? WA38 source: GFG 2011 Cosmic WA2 Crisp © 2014 Stefano MusacchMusacchi Apple production in Italy by Regions

Others: Emilia-Romagna 8% Piedemont 9 % Veneto 10 % South and Mid Italy 1%

5 cultivars account for 1957 tons 82% Prognosfruit 2014

Cultivar distribution (year 2006)

35 31.3 30 % Italia* % Emilia-Romagna 25 21.6 20.0 20 19.1 Rootstocks 15.4 14.8 15 11.8 11.6 12.5 8.7 10 Percentuale (%) 8.0 4.2 5.2 4.9 3.6 5 2.2 2.3 1.4 1.0 1.8 1.0 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.8 0

Fuji

Jonagold Braeburn Ozark Gold Pink Lady®Altre varietà Gala (gruppo) Red Delicious Granny Smith Golden delicious Renette (gruppo) Stayman (gruppo)

Imperatore-Rome B.(gruppo)

Italy = Piedemont, Veneto, Emilia-Romagna, Trentino Alto Adige

M.7 M.26 M.9 (Large) MM106 New rootstocks are under evaluation in Europe. M9 337 is the most Pajam 2, EMLA important rootstock utilized. Environmental M.9 (Small) Nic29 Mark T337 B.9 conditions

15-30% 30-35% 35-40% 40-50% 50-75% >75% G.16 G.30 G.11 Fire blight resistant G.41* G.210* G.202 Replant tolerant G.214* G.890* * Wooly apple aphid resistant G.222 G.969 G.935 19 © 2014 Stefano Musacchi Modified for Washington State conditions after Terence Robinson, Cornell-Geneva; Gennaro Fazio, USDA-ARS Geneva

Latitude of the main apple area

48.3667° N, 119.5811° W 1 Okanogan, Coordinates

47.8411° N, 120.0464° W 2 Lake Chelan, Coordinates

47.4233° N, 120.3253° W 3 Wenatchee, Coordinates 46.2442° N, 124.0581° 4 Columbia River, Coo

46.6000° N, 120.5000° W 5 Yakima, Coordinates

© 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi Native vegetation = shrub steppe (estepa arbustiva) Washington has many and long sunny days, which Low annual means high potential for dry matter accumulation, but Climate data in WA apple production areas, 2009-2013 high heat can reduce net photosynthesis precipitation Cen and Sage 2005 Avg Extreme Avg Extreme Avg Max First Last • The central enzyme involved in Min Min Max Max Avg Wind Wind RH Solar Frost Frost Area Elev. Temp Temp Temp Temp Temp Speed Gust (%) Precip Radiation Date Date (125-250 mm/yr) carbon fixation does not operate as 1263 ft 38.5 °F -4.6 °F 59.8 °F 103.8 °F 49.2 °F 3.5 mph 35.3 mph 10.47 in Oct 04 to Apr 24 to Okanogan1 62.3 5098 MJ/m2 385 m 3.6 °C -20.3 °C 15.4 °C 39.9 °C 9.6 °C 1.6 m/s 15.8 m/s 26.6 cm Oct 23 May 21 effectively at high temperatures (Cen

1255 ft 42.8 °F 0.8 °F 59.6 °F 101.4 °F 50.6 °F 4.4 mph 43.2 mph 11.9 in Oct 10 to Mar 14 to and Sage 2005) Lake Chelan2 59.1 4969 MJ/m2 383 m 6.0 °C -17.3 °C 15.3 °C 38.6 °C 10.3 °C 2.0 m/s 19.3 m/s 30.3 cm Nov 10 Apr 10

790 ft 40.4 °F -6.6 °F 62.2 °F 106.4 °F 51.2 °F 2.9 mph 67.4 mph 9.50 in Oct 4 to Apr 5 to Some methods to used to Wenatchee3 62.7 5073 MJ/m2 241 m 4.7 °C -21.4 °C 16.8 °C 41.3 °C 10.7 °C 1.3 m/s 30.1 m/s 24.1 cm Oct 25 Apr 23 mitigate the effects of sun’s 1180 ft 39.0 °F -4.7 °F 61.0 °F 103.8 °F 50.0 °F 5.6 mph 54.7 mph 8.53 in Oct 5 to Apr 24 to Columbia4 65.5 5701 MJ/m2 360 m 3.9 °C -20.4 °C 16.1 °C 39.9 °C 10.0 °C 2.5 m/s 24.4 m/s 21.7 cm Oct 25 May 11 heat 840 ft 38.2 °F -9.7 °F 63.6 °F 101.6 °F 51.2 °F 3.1 mph 45.4 mph 5.89 in Sep 30 to Apr 26 to Yakima5 63.1 5538 MJ/m2 256 m 3.4 °C -23.2 °C 17.6 °C 38.6 °C 10.6 °C 1.4 m/s 20.3 m/s 15.0 cm Oct 25 May 10 • Shade nets increase water use efficiency and net photosynthetic rate (Gindaba et al 2007) Weather Stations used: 1 Pogue Flat Irrigation from the 2 Chelan South • Overhead watering can be used to 3 WSU-TFREC 4 WSU Othello reduce heat and evapotranspiration 5 Wapato Columbia River (Green et al. 2013) Drainage Photo credit Dr. Jinwook Lee

Wenatchee District Columbia Basin Yakima Valley • Diverse topography and elevation range • The center of tree fruit •Primarily apple production in the Pacific • 85% of Washington’s winter pear production production, with some Northwest • 45% of PNW’s sweet cherry production sweet cherry • Produces half the apples • Rapidly growing population in the region has edged out •Young, modern and sweet cherries some production orchards grown in Washington •Generally flat and lower • Mixed topography, but elevation; higher generally warmer than areas further north Photo credit Dr. Jinwook Lee temperatures

Photo credit Dr. Jinwook Lee

Photo credit Dr. Jinwook Lee Photo credit Dr. Jinwook Lee

© 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi Relative humidity (%): South-Tyrol-climate Latitude of the main apple area Bologna (Italy) vs Wenatchee (WA) • Temperate-sub continental climate with cold winter and hot summer. • In the south of the Alps the growing season is longer than in the northern. 46.5000° N, 11.3500° E Bolzano, Coordinates • The fruit gain quality from the 300 days and more than 2,000 hours of sun each year. 46.0667° N, 11.1167° E Trento, Coordinates • Rainfall ranges from 450 mm to 800 mm from driest to wettest areas. • Spring frost is an issue; most orchards have frost protection systems 44.8333° N, 11.6167° E (overhead sprinklers). Ferrara, Coordinates • Hail is a yearly problem: 10-20% orchards are damaged by that. 44.5075° N, 11.3514° E • Bologna, Coordinates Higher evapotranspiration season is increasing together with sunburn. • Fall conditions with warm days and cool nights are optimal for fruit coloring, more than in the Po valley. • Water table is high and so water is not a problem and it’s cheap.

South-Tyrol-soil characteristics STRENGHTS: Emilia-Romagna-climate: South-Tyrol: % Long tradition of cooperative growers organizations % sub-continental temperate climate that varies with Upper Adige valley: Replanting problems: % HDP for limitation of land altitude and distance from the coast. In the Po % 80% plantings are in sandy loam % The same sites have been % Favorable climate in a mountain area valley continental features are weakly reduced. (clay 85% to 15%), 5.5

% Orchard soil: deep, rich in clay and silt suited for this kind of region, for example: Gala, Fuji, with (loam to clay-loamy soils, with few sandly- all their clones, Pink Lady® and Modì®. % loam soils) with medium-high CEC, often In flat areas, a reduction of traditional cultivars such as saturated with Ca>Mg-K>Na. Golden and Red Delicious, Jonagold, Rome Beauty was % Usually subalkaline to alkaline soils with reposted and the increase cultivation of new ones. % variability in calcium carbonate content Apple cultivation surface in Emilia Romagna decreased in (0-15%) that affect tree nutrition ten years (1987-1996) from 17.829 ha to 7.826 ha, - (Scotti, 2008) Calcareous land with river bump 56.1%, and the situation was similar in Veneto region (Tagliavini, 2002). Piedemont land with low calcareous level % Organic matter is low. Po river abandoned land. (Niceto and Febi (1997). © 2014 Stefano Musacchi % M9 is probably the most widely-planted of all rootstocks, © 2014 StefanoStefatefano Musacchi Musacchiacch © 2014 Stefano Musacchi

Training system and planting density Training system and planting density Training systems development Training systems development Training systems in Italy:

Spindle-bush Slender spindle Superspindle • Solaxe – Centrifugo • Spindle Classic vase • Bi-axis VarietyVarietà FormaTraining di allevamento system Planting Densità density ProduzioneYield (average (media 16-20 16-20 years) anni) Alberi/ha(tree/ha) Kg/alberokg/tree McIntosh/MM111 Vaso aperto 299 102 Central leader 299 108 Central leader Palmette leader 299 119 Lasko et al., 1989

Ferree (1980) collected more productive efficiency with Palmette (1,121 tree/ha) than Slender Spindle (2,151 tree/ha), mini central leader (795 tree/ha) and pyramid (425 Tatura trellis Y V Solen tree/ha). Palmette leader source: Lezzer et al., 2011 source: Lezzer et al., 2011 © 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi Emilia Romagna- training systems: Apple orchard design Emilia Romagna- varieties and training systems: % increase of production costs and the release of new varieties led to HDP specialized orchards, with early bearing, but a shorter life. Planting High density orchard trained at Super spindle induces Spacing density % Training system (m) Training system for apple in flat areas, are many and are related principally to early bearing starting from the second year. (trees/ha) Cultivar the cultivar vigor, the rootstock, and the necessity to have fruit with high Spindle 3.3 x 0.8 3.788 Gala. Rosy Glow percentage of color. intensive 3.3 x 0.9 3.367 Fuji

% Orchard density can range between 1,500 (Solaxe) trees/ha up to 10,000 Its weak points are: Spindle 3.5 x 1.0 3.125 Gala, Fuji and Rosy Glow trees/ha (Super spindle). standard need of high level of technology; Bi-axis 3.3 x 1.2 2.525 Gala, Fuji and Rosy Glow excess of vigor especially in the Po valley;

lifespan less than 15 years. Solaxe - 4.0 x 1.1-1.2 2.083-2.273 Gala and Rosy Glow Centrifuge 4.0 x 1.3-1.5 1.667-1.923 Fuji

Spindle Fuji/M9 2nd year 3.3 x 0.9 m nd Spindle Cripps Pink/M9 2 year Solaxe and centrifugal system

Balance between fruiting and vegetative growth achieved in a natural way, without interfering with pruning. Form a weeping willow and create a light cone Fruiting in the external part of the branches.

FUJI/PAJAM2 - 2nd year 3.5 X 0.9 M

2004 2005 80 2004 2005 2006

70 28

60 37 31 18 12 50 24 14 21 10 34 37 41 24 10 13 40 40 26 34 15 23 23 30 17 13 8 25 15 14 17 20 22 22 30 20 16 54 10 46 46 20 41 42 40 42 40 37 35 38 31 32 33 30 28 28 28 29 30 3 27 26 28 27 25 23 22 22 23 22 24 10 21 19 21 21 12

0 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 F1 F2 F3 F4 F5 F6

PINK LADY CRIPPS PINK PINK LADY CRIPPSPINK LADY PINK CRIPPSPINK PINK LADY CRIPPS PINK

Double chip budding Cripps Pink: Apple orchard design effect of fruit position in the canopy Trees with two axes low middle high New ideas regarding tree shape include plants with 2 or 3 axes so as to divide the vigor over more branches.

The innovative ‘Bibaum ®’ system is a in Bench graft nursery -pre-formed split-branches tree that obviates the delay of canopy formation.

High productivity Fruit distribution in the canopy is homogeneous Low pruning cost. Only few branches have to be bended Better vigor control esp. in the Po valley High level of mechanization: pruning and thinning Difficult to produce good tree in the Second trial: nursery. Location: Migliaro (Ferrara) Sometime the two axes present a different Graft combination: Rosy vigor. Glow/M9T337

Training system: Bi-axes and Spindle Year of planting: 2006 Planting distance and density: Spindle: 3.3 x 0.8 m (3,788 trees/ha)

Second Trial: Rosy Glow/M9 T337 – Medelana (FERRARA) Planting year 2006. Fuji (Ravenna): Fuji: Year 4 (Ravenna) - Data 2006 – Productive and vegetative traits 2007 Shoots number at various tree heights different overcolor in the bottom part of the tree – Year 4

(m) Spindle Bi-axis a >2.4 b P<0.01 Planting Fruit Yield effic. Calc. Yield Training system density Yield /tree (kg) Fruit weight (g) TSA (cm2) number (kg/cm2) (t/ha) (trees/ha) a 1.8-2.4 Bi-axis 3788 21,2 5,02 a 238 a 5,34 a 0,97 19,0 b P<0.01 Spindle 3788 23,2 5,18 b 226 b 4,27 b 1,24 19,6 Significance ns ns * * ns ns a 1.2-1.8 b P<0.01 Planting Fruit Yield Calc. Calc. Bi-axes density Fruit number Yield /tree (kg) weight TSA (cm2) effic. Yield Yield (%) (trees/ha) (g) (kg/cm2) (t/ha) a Tree height layers (cm) (cm) height layers Tree 0-1.2 Large branch 3788 8,8 b 2,07 b 238 3,41 a 0,61 b 7,8 41,2 b P<0.01 Small branch 3788 12,4 a 2,95 a 239 2,25 b 1,37 a 11,2 58,8 Significance * * ns * * 19,0 100,0 0 5 10 15 20 25 Shoot number Bi-axis Spindle (Source: Dorigoni, 2008; Dorigoni et al., in press) © 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi Fuji: Year 4 (Ravenna) - Data 2006 – Modi: Habitus investigation results: comparison among training 1–year shoot lenght at various tree heights systems Yield (kg) per training systems divided by bearing wood 2011

(m)

n.s. 12.00 >2.4 Farm M 0.29 b 2.8% Training systems 10.00 1.42 13.4% b P<0.01 2.41 b 23.0% 1.8-2.4 a 8.00 in Washington 0.41 b 3.9% 3.15 29.7%

Spur on branches (2-3-4) b P<0.01 6.00 1.2-1.8

Kg/tree 1.56 a 14.7% Shoot

4.00 Brindilla Tree height layers (cm) (cm) layers height Tree 7.36 a 70.3% Spur on axis b P<0.01 0-1.2 Bi-axis 4.47 42.2% a 2.00 Spindle

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0.00 Length (cm) Bi-axis Spindle

Examples of apple tree training systems

Slender Spindle Vertical Axis

4D 3 D 2 D Central Leader V System Advantages of fruiting walls Accessibility: pruning, thinning, harvest Quality: exposure to sunlight, sprays Simplicity: training, mechanization

Observations in Washington Statee

Mechanization

30 cm

Mechanization in Italy Mechanization in Washington State % Harvest and pruning assisted by platforms are a common practices in Italian orchards. % Tall canopies systems are still mainly managed with ladders for % Use of platforms: all the practices (pruning, thinning, harvest, covering with nets). % • Reduced the costs of each practice Ladders issues: • Low labor efficiency • Improve the work conditions and safety • Increase number of injuries and insurance issues • Decrease the time for each practices and downtime suppression (Martelli, 2003). % Rising cost of the labor and lack of workers. % Use of “bin-train” attached to the tractor allows a better organization % Experimental trials in WA about the use of platforms showed of the work within the rows with a pre-sorting of the fruit during the increase in work efficiency for all the orchard practices from 19% harvest of the lower layer. to 67% (Baugher et al., 2009). % % Recent introduction of thinning machines, like Darwin to reduce the Mechanical harvesters improve logistics with potential decrease in fruit damages, allows second working shift, but requires time spent for hand thinning (38(3(3838h8 h/ha,h/ha,ha,ha, Wilton,WiltoWiltWilltot n,n, 2000)202 000)00). capital investments (Gallardo et al., 2012). They cost $60,000 to $250,000 (Lewis, 2012).

© 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 2010140114 StefanoStefaStefSteStStefateftefaefanooMuoMo Musacchi MusMuMususacchiacchaccacacchicchcccchchi (Photo: K. Lewis) (Photo: GFG) © 2014 Stefano Musacchi cost of labor for picking

Front looping machine for orchards (hedging and topping) Mechanical thinning Saw with bar and windows (different levels of cutting) FAMA

Darwin at 9 km/h on bi-axis orchard in Adige valley

Pruning machine suitable for high density orchard. Vertical bar, up to 280 cm long with knife “SCH”, can be matched upper and lower top with tilting and hydraulic return. The max cutting diameter is 3cm.

Source: http://www.famapruning.com/contenuti/pdf/FAMA-Apparato-taglio-per-CMA250.pdf

© 2014 Stefano Musacchi http://www.famapruning.com/contenuti/pdf/FAMA-Apparato-taglio-per-CMA250.pdf © 2014 Stefano Musacchi © 2014 Stefano Musacchi Effect of mechanical pruning on flower bud formation Root pruning: lateral pruning in winter (February) Root pruning effects

Control Two sides pruned in winter

Observations in Washington State Observations in Washington State

Orchard trellis in USA

The Italian system How to build the structure ?

Hail Damage

Post at the Corner post beguine of the row

Intermediate post

Lateral post

Alt carpo (physical barrier against Codling moth) Alt carpo (physical barrier against Codling moth)

Alternative to fumigation ? Types of water use

Soil, water Frost Overhead impact sprinklers Protection Undertree impact sprinklers and nutrient Overhead/Undertree impact sprinklers Irrigation management Drip Microsprinklers Evaporative Overhead impact sprinklers Cooling Overhead microsprinklers

Fertigation Drip

CONTROLLED WATER STRESS Drip REGION-WIDE IRRIGATION INPUTS irrigation 35 CIC 30 29 100 Fruit Threshold stress 25 Bloom – growing- SOGLIA DI STRESS fruit set 20 80 Harvest 16.5 15.6 15 Post-harvest 8.4 10 60 5.2 4.8 3.5 60 days 5 2.6 1.3 after 0 fruit set 40 Fertigation irrigation irrigation KIWI PEAR PLUM KAKI PEACH APPLE APRICOT CHERRY % Acqua Disponibile NECTARINE 20 % of water available % of water About 70% of pear acreage in Emilia-Romagna is irrigated: avg. Seasonal volume stress stress about 2000 m3/ha = 40 million m3/yr 0 StageFase 1 FaseStage 2 2 StageFase 3 FaseStage 4 4 PA Anconelli and Mannini, 2002 Different typology of station for fertigation system Different pipeline for fertigation Water-saving: micro-irrigation Drop on line It entails: •Water near plants •Frequently scheduled inputs •Long on-times •Low-pressure release Drop on line integral

Advantages • Water- & energy-savings •Less nutrient wash-out Microjet •Less pesticide input •Better uniform coverage •Greater irrigation precision •Easy scheduling •Lower system & overhead costs (on wide-row crops) Anconelli and Mannini, 2002

Localize to much water distribution can reduce the efficiency of water use Crop Few dripper can Frost enhance water lost and reduced management protection contact with the roots

Increase the dripper number

Strategic pruning Bloom thinning

Postbloom thinning Smart hand thinning Extenday Mylar Improved fruit EU banned the use of Carbaryl color harvest timing ield

Why do we SUNBUR Prevention strategies care? N Overhead netting Evaporative cooling US $30 US$ 18 Protective coatings

0 1 2 3 4 5

Surround

RaynoxRaynox Source: Mike Taylor, Stemilt Growers, LLC.; 2012 Humidity, pests and ….physiology! Pest Management % High humidity favors the development of disease organisms (Prokopy et al., 1994). % Powdery mildew grows well in high humidity areas. % Venturia inaequalis requires a minimum amount of wetness hours for ascospores and Arthropods Pests conidia to infect leaves according to different temperatures (Sandskär, 2003). Codling Moth % High RH favors easy germination of fungal spores on plant leaves. Direct Pests – % Wind and low humidity favor evaporative losses of liquid pesticides applications, while damage fruit KEY Pest Crop high humidity increases foliar penetration for highly ionic pesticides (Lieslie, 1994).

Very High Relative humidity: protection Leafrollers - campylomma - thrips - San Jose scale - stink bugs • Reduces evapotranspiration • Increases heat load of plants • Stomatal closure

• Reduced CO2 uptake • Reduced transpiration influences translocation of food materials and nutrients. Indirect Pests – damage foliage, bark or roots • Moderately high RH of 60-70% is beneficial. Aphids - leafhoppers - spider mites - leafminers • Low RH increases the evapotranspiration. http://agritech.tnau.ac.in/agriculture/agri_agrometeorology_relativehumidit y.html

Pest Management Transition: Challenges and Consequences OP ERA: 1960-2010 Pheromone technology adoption and IPM in Washington • Dominated by use of OP insecticides for key and Natural Enemies of Arthropod Pests secondary pests Biological Control of Pests • Secondary pests (e.g. aphids, leafhoppers) Aphids - leafhoppers - spider mites - leafminers developed resistance to OP insecticides • Key pests still controlled by OPs – slow expression of resistance provided stability • Biological control of some (mites, leafhoppers, leafminers) was possible – NEs resistance to OPs • High risk to farm workers and environment

Predator mite Leafminer parasite Leafhopper parasite New Threats Internet-based Brown Marmorated Stink Bug Cripps Pink/M26 Decision Assist Systems Bad combination Fire blight Threatens IPM Peach

Cherry Apple

Grape Management Pruning Antibiotics Antagonistic bacteria Soybean Powered by AgWeatherNet Kasumin Corn

New Threats –New Threats New Transition A

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION !!!

Antibiotics

Antibiotics are banned in EU