Should New York Growers Plant Higher Density Peach Orchards?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Should New York Growers Under the moderate growth conditions of Plant Higher Density New York State and the relatively short orchard Peach Orchards? lifespan of peach, 1 2 high density orchard Stephen A. Hoying , Terence L. Robinson and planting systems offer 2 Robert L. Andersen significant early yield, 2Cornell Cooperative Extension, Lake Ontario Fruit Program, Newark, NY and mature yield 2 Department of Horticultural Sciences, NYSAES, Cornell University, advantages over the Geneva, NY traditional Open Center system. In our study, the ew York State is on the northern Materials And Methods Perpendicular-V system limit of successful peach and the Tri-V system had Nproduction areas. Peach trees in In 1999, a replicated field trial NY suffer from perennial cankers comparing six peach orchard training yields and high economic (Cytospora spp.) and winter cold damage systems (Open Center, Quad-V, Tri-V, in some years. This limits the useful life Perpendicular-V, Central Leader and returns compared of a peach orchard to about 15 years. Slender Spindle) with three varieties to the traditional Traditionally, peach trees have been [Allstar (yellow peach), Blushingstar grown using the open center system at (white peach) and Flavortop (nectarine)] Open Center system. densities of 350-400 trees/ha. Mature tree all on Bailey rootstock was planted at height has been limited to 2.5m and tree Olcott, New York. Tree densities and spread has extended up to 5m in spacings are given in Table 1. was removed. Two of the four scaffolds diameter. This results in rather short trees The Open Center System was were oriented to each side of the row and that can be harvested largely from the developed based on heading the leader oriented to opposite quadrants of the tree. ground. However, the low tree density at 40cm at planting. In the second year, In the dormant seasons of the second results in poor yield during the early four well-placed scaffold branches were through fourth years, the four scaffolds years. In addition, the low tree stature of selected and headed by one third and the were pruned to an angle of 65° above the the NY open center system results in low leader was removed. Each of the four horizontal and allowed to extend to a mature yields that do not exceed 20 Mt/ scaffolds was bifurcated at two-foot height of 3.25m. In the late dormant ha. Warmer peach producing areas have intervals by heading successively in the season of each year, all secondary significantly higher yield than NY dormant seasons of the second through branches that were not fruiting twigs (DeJong, et al., 1994). The relatively cool fourth years. The scaffolds were pruned were removed back to a side shoot or bud summers of NY State result in moderate to an angle of 50° above horizontal. In the near the scaffold. This resulted in shoot growth and relatively slow tree fifth year, tree height was limited to 2.5m columnar scaffold branches with the development during the early years of a by lowering the top branches down to a fruiting twigs produced on or near the new orchard. Under these conditions of horizontal side branch. scaffolds. slow tree growth and short orchard life, The Quad-V system also was The Tri-V system was developed in high- density orchard systems have great developed by heading the leader at 40cm a manner similar to the Quad-V system potential to improve yield and at planting. In the second year, four well- except only three scaffolds branches were profitability of peach orchards (Loreti and placed scaffold branches were selected allowed to develop. They were oriented Massai, 2002). and headed by one third and the leader perpendicular to the row with two on one TABLE 1 Six orchard planting systems evaluated in the New York peach systems trial. Tree Density/ Tree Spacing Initial Tree Heading System Name Description Ha (m) Height (cm) Open Center 4 scaffold branches with 3 bifurcations. 384 4.3 X 6.1 60 Quad-V 4 scaffold branches without bifurcation and with renewal pruning. 538 3.0 X 6.1 45 Tri-V 3 scaffold branches without bifurcation and with renewal pruning. 905 2.1 X 5.2 45 Central Leader Central trunk with permanent lower tier of 4 branches. 1,098 2.1 X 4.3 100 Perpendicular-V 2 scaffold branches without bifurcation and with renewal pruning. 1,583 1.2 X 5.2 45 Slender Spindle Central trunk with no permanent lower tier branches. 1,922 1.2 X 4.3 100 2 NEW YORK STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY 40 Open Center 120 A Quad-Vee Open Center Tri -Vee ) Quad-Vee Perp-Vee 2 30 100 Central Leader Slender Spindle Tri-Vee 80 20 Central Leader Yield (kg/tree) Perp-Vee Trunk X-Sectional Area (cm 60 10 Slender Spindle 40 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 0 Planting Density (trees/ha) 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Year Figure 1. Effect of increasing planting density on peach tree size after 6 years in the orchard. 40 Open Center B Quad-Vee side and one on the other, alternating down the row. In the Tri -Vee dormant seasons of the second through fourth years, the scaf- 30 Perp-Vee folds were headed each year by one third to a side branch that Central Leader continued in the 65° upward direction. The scaffolds were al- Slender Spindle lowed to extend to a height of 3.25m. In the late dormant sea- son each year, all secondary branches that were not fruiting 20 twigs were removed back to a side shoot or bud near the scaf- fold. This resulted in columnar scaffold branches with the fruit- ing twigs produced on or near the scaffolds. Annual Yield (Mt/ha) The Perpendicular-V system was developed in a manner 10 similar to the Quad-V system except only two scaffolds branches were allowed to develop. They were oriented per- pendicular to the row. In the dormant seasons of the second through fourth years, the scaffolds were headed each year by 0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 one third to a side branch that continued in the 65° upward Year direction. The scaffolds were allowed to extend to a height of 3.25m. In the late dormant season each year, all secondary Figure 2. Annual yields per tree (A) and per hectare (B) of 6 peach orchard systems over the first 6 years of orchard development. branches that were not fruiting twigs were removed back to a side shoot or bud near the scaffold. This resulted in columnar scaffold branches with the fruiting twigs produced on or tral leader except that no permanent size. The highest density system had a near the scaffolds. lower tier scaffold branches were al- trunk cross-sectional area that was less The Central Leader system was de- lowed. Large branches were renewed than half the size of the lowest density veloped by heading the leader at 100cm back to the trunk on an annual basis by system. at planting and removing large diameter cutting to a side shoot or bud near the Yield. In the second year (2000) the feathers (larger than two thirds diameter trunk. trees had a very small crop followed by of leader). During the second through the An economic analysis of profitabil- significant commercial crops in the third fourth years, the leader was headed by ity was done using actual yields, simu- year and large commercial crops in the one third each year and a strong vertical lated packout, material costs and labor fourth-sixth years (Figure 2A). On a land shoot arising near the heading cut was inputs through year six. We added pro- area basis, the Central Leader and the trained as the leader. In the second year, jections of yield, packout and labor costs Slender Spindle systems, which had the a lower tier of four scaffolds was selected for years 7-15 based on average yield for least pruning at planting, had the highest and pruned to horizontal by shortening years five and six. (Robinson and 2nd year yield/ha while all of the other each branch back to a horizontal side Hoying, 2004). four systems which required severe head- branch. Large diameter branches along ing at planting, had very low 2nd year Results the leader were renewed back to the yield (Figure 2B). In the third year, the trunk on an annual basis by stubbing Growth. After six years the largest Slender Spindle and Perpendicular-V had back to a bud or side shoot near the trees (measured as trunk cross-sectional the highest yield/ha followed by the Cen- leader. This created a columnar leader area) were from the traditional Open tral Leader, Tri-V, Quad-V and Open Cen- with fruiting twigs arising near the Center system (Figure 1). The smallest ter, which had the lowest yield. In the leader. Tree height was limited to 3.25m. trees were from the highest density Slen- fourth through sixth years, the Perpen- The Slender Spindle system was de- der Spindle system. There was a strong dicular-V had the highest yield followed veloped in a manner similar to the cen- negative effect of tree density on tree by the Slender Spindle, Tri-V, Central NEW YORK FRUIT QUARTERLY • VOLUME 13 NUMBER 4 • 2005 3 90 200 Open Center A Quad-Vee 80 Quad-Vee Tri -Vee 190 Perp-Vee Central Leader 70 Open Center Slender Spindle 180 Tri-Vee 60 Perp-Vee Fruit Size (g) 170 Cum. Yield/tree (kg) 50 Central Leader 40 160 Slender Spindle 30 150 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2002 2003 2004 Planting Density (trees/ha) Year 125 Figure 4.