THE ASIAN JOURNAL OF HORTICULTURE Volume 9 | Issue 2 | Dec., 2014 | 301-304 AJH Visit us -www.researchjournal.co.in eISSN- 0976-724X RESEARCH PAPER DOI : 10.15740/HAS/TAJH/9.2/301-304

Article history : Received : 01.04.2014 Effect of different stionic combinations on fruiting Revised : 20.09.2014 Accepted : 06.10.2014 and quality of cv. PUNJAB BEAUTY

P.P.S. GILL AND NAV PREM SINGH1 Members of the Research Forum ABSTRACT : The rootstock and/or inter-stock, and in particular their union with the scion, bring Associated Authors: about their effects upon the scion by influencing the endogenous hormones, water and mineral elements Department of Fruit Science, Punjab Agricultural University, LUDHIANA within the . Hence, the effect of various rootstocks and interstocks on growth, fruiting and quality (PUNJAB) of semi-soft pear cv. PUNJAB BEAUTY was evaluated at Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana during the year 2013. The results show great variability among different stionic combinations. Double combination of Patharnakh cutting/Punjab Beauty resulted maximum plant height while minimum

growth was observed in T10 (Patharnakh cutting/ Patharnakh/ Punjab Beauty) treatment. Rootstock

and interstock girth was maximum in T5 (Kainth large fruited/ Sucker/ Punjab Beauty) treatment

while T10 combination recorded lowest values of rootstock and interstock girth. Similarly, scion girth of Punjab Beauty pear was maximum when Kainth small fruited was used as rootstock. The fruit

number and yield per plant were recorded highest in T5 treatment while T15 combination resulted lowest yield. The fruit weight was maximum from double stoinic combination of Shiara/Punjab Beauty.

The fruits from stionic combination of Sucker/ Sucker/ Punjab Beauty were softer, while T4 treatment resulted maximum fruit firmness. Double combination of Kainth small fruited/ Punjab Beauty resulted Author for correspondence : maximum TSS contents of fruits while the acid content remain unaffected by any treatment. P.P.S. GILL Department of Fruit Science, Punjab KEY WORDS : Rootstock, Interstock, Pear, Yield, Quality Agricultural University, LUDHIANA (PUNJAB) INDIA HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE : Gill, P.P.S. and Singh, Nav Prem (2014). Effect of different stionic combinations on Email : [email protected] fruiting and quality of pear cv. PUNJAB BEAUTY. Asian J. Hort., 9(2) : 301-304.

ear is one of the most important temperate fruit crop Reil, 1990) since correct rootstock can determine the short being cultivated under sub-tropical conditions of north- and long term health of the trees. The ultimate effect of Pwestern India. It has long juvenility period and rootstock on the plant growth or yield is function of many already puts up significant vegetative growth before onset of primary effects of rootstock manifested in the scion. It has commercial bearing. Like most of other fruit plants, the pear been documented that the rootstock regulates plant vigour, too is vegetatively propagated. The suckers of Patharnakh nutrient uptake and ionic balance, stionic compatibility, and Kainth seedlings are two commonly used rootstocks for tolerance to soil and environmental stresses which ultimately propagation of pear in India. Suckers has a serious setback affects the fruit yield and fruit quality of scion cultivars of root suckering, while Kainth is free from it. However, (Westwood et al., 1971 and Chaplin et al., 1972). Hence, under subtropical conditions, the Kainth (Pyrus pashia) is these investigations were undertaken to investigate the effect widely used rootstock of pear. The plants this rootstocks are of different rootstocks and interstocks on the yield and quality vigorous in nature. Owing to large size these plants are attributes of pear cultivar Punjab Beauty. difficult to manage for various cultural operation like pruning, spraying and harvesting. So need has been felt to try some RESEARCH METHODS other combinations of rootstocks, and interstocks and study The present studies on effect of various rootstock their effect on plant growth and bearing behaviour of the interstock combinations on growth, yield and fruit quality variety. Selection of rootstock is an important consideration were undertaken during the year 2013 at Fruit Research Farm, in pear production (Lambard and Westwood, 1986, 1987, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, situated at 30° 56´

HIND AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND TRAINING INSTITUTE P.P.S. GILL AND NAV PREM SINGH

N and 75° 52´ E with an altitude of 247 m above mean sea was removed at reading spot. Total soluble solids were level. Ten-years-old semi-soft pear cv. PUNJAB BEAUTY was determined using digital refractometer (ATAGO, Japan). For raised on various different stionic combinations. The plants acidity, fruit juice was titrated with 0.1 N NaOH and the were spaced at 6.5 m in square system of planting and results were expressed in terms of percentage of malic acid. maintained under uniform cultural management practices. Data obtained from experiment were pooled and subjected The experiment was laid out in Randomized Block Design. to analysis of variance (ANOVA) using statistical analysis There were fifteen treatments, two plants constituted the unit software package CPCS1 (Cheema and Singh, 1990). of treatment and each treatment was replicated three times.

The combinations were T1- (Shiara/ Patharnakh/ Punjab RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION Beauty); T - (Shiara/ Sucker/ Punjab Beauty); T - (Shiara/ 2 3 Data presented in Table 1 show that different treatments Punjab Beauty); T - (Kainth large fruited/ Patharnakh/ Punjab 4 significantly influenced plant height and plant spread. The Beauty); T - (Kainth large fruited/ Sucker/ Punjab Beauty); 5 maximum plant height (5.00 m) was recorded in T treatment T - (Kainth large fruited/ Punjab Beauty); T - (Kainth small 12 6 7 which was significantly higher than all other treatments fruited/ Patharnakh/ Punjab Beauty); T - (Kainth small 8 except T , T , T , T and T treatments. Similarly, triple fruited/ Sucker/ Punjab Beauty); T - (Kainth small fruited/ 1 2 5 7 9 9 combination of Kainth small fruited/ Sucker/ Punjab Beauty Punjab Beauty); T - (Patharnakh cutting/ Patharnakh/ 10 resulted in lowest plant height of 4.05 m. In earlier studies, Punjab Beauty); T - (Patharnakh cutting/ Sucker/ Punjab 11 Kaundal et al. (1989) reported that four scion varieties, viz., Beauty); T - (Patharnakh cutting/ Punjab Beauty); T - 12 13 Baggugosha, Smith, LeConte and Patharnakh attained (Sucker/ Patharnakh/ Punjab Beauty); T - (Sucker/ Sucker/ 14 significantly greater plant height on Kainth rootstock as Punjab Beauty); and T - (Sucker/ Punjab Beauty). The plant 15 compared to pear suckers. Similar observation were put forth height was noted with help of graduated bamboo pole, while by Bajwa et al. (1972 and 1974) and Sharma et al. (1979). spread was noted with measuring tape on both East-West Similarly, North and Cook (2008) also reported that rootstock and North-South directions and then averaged. The data on had a significant effect on stem diameter and plant height. the section, rootstock and inter-stock girth were recorded Various stionic combination significantly influenced plant with the help of measuring tape. A random sample of 20 spread. The combination of Kainth large fruited/ Sucker/ fruits from each replication was taken for physico-chemical Punjab Beauty (T ) produced maximum plant spread followed analysis. The yield (kg/plant) was calculated at the time of 5 by T1 combination. The minimum plant spread (2.13 m) was harvesting by multiplying the fruit weight with number of registered in combination of Patharnakh cutting/ Patharnakh/ fruits per plant. Fruit weight was recorded by using electronic Punjab Beauty (T ) which was at par with spread of plants weighing balance and expressed in grams. Fruit firmness 10 in T4 and T11 treatments. Various interstock and rootstock was determined with hand held penetrometer (FT-327, USA) large fruited/ Sucker/ Punjab Beauty which was significantly by taking readings on opposite sides along the fruit equatorial higher as compared to rest of treatments, except, in T and region using 8 mm stainless steel probe. The skin of the fruit 9

Table 1 : Influence of different stionic combination on plant growth, rootstock, inter stock and scion girth of pear cv. PUNJAB BEAUTY Treatments Plant height (cm) Plant spread (cm) Rootstock girth (cm) Inter stock girth (cm) Scion girth (cm)

T1 4.93 3.58 63.2 56.4 53.6

T2 4.91 2.53 61.0 63.0 49.3

T3 4.52 2.77 50.4 - 41.6

T4 4.26 2.24 48.5 44.3 41.3

T5 4.81 3.64 71.8 69.2 56.3

T6 4.43 2.91 56.6 - 47.0

T7 4.78 3.33 62.0 54.4 49.6

T8 4.05 2.69 49.3 58.3 39.3

T9 4.99 3.54 65.3 - 58.0

T10 4.14 2.13 40.4 37.2 36.6

T11 4.38 2.37 52.6 47.2 41.0

T12 5.00 2.91 57.8 - 51.6

T13 4.68 2.79 56.7 52.2 45.0

T14 4.54 3.12 65.2 53.3 49.3

T15 4.37 2.53 48.8 - 40.0 C.D. (P=0.05) 0.27 0.38 7.8 5.9 6.6

Asian J. Hort., 9(2) Dec., 2014 : 301-304 302 Hind Agricultural Research and Training Institute EFFECT OF DIFFERENT STIONIC COMBINATIONS ON FRUITING & QUALITY OF PEAR

T14 stoinic combinations. The minimum stock girth (40.4 on tree vigour was greater when used as rootstock than as a cm) was observed in triple combination of Patharnakh scion. cutting/ Patharnakh/ Punjab Beauty (T10) which also recorded Different treatments significantly influenced number lowest plant spread. Interstock girth was maximum (69.2 of harvested fruit per plant. Maximum number of fruits per cm) in T5 treatment (Kainth large fruited/ Sucker/ Punjab plant (389) were obtained from plants raised on Kainth large

Beauty) and minimum interstock girth was noted in T10 fruited rootstock using sucker as interstock (Table 2). It was treatment (37.2 cm). No inter-stock was used in T3, T6, T9, significantly higher as compared to all other treatments

T12 and T15 treatments. Interstock out grows to rootstock in except T9 treatment. However, significantly lower number

T2 and T8 combination, while, its growth suppressed as of fruits per plants was recoded in T15 treatment. Mielke et compared to rootstock in T1, T4, T5, T7, T10, T11, T13 and T14 al. (2008) reported that rootstock significantly affected treatments. Scion girth of Punjab Beauty pear was maximum number of fruits/plant. It is also evident that different stionic (58.0 cm) in double combination of Kainth small fruited/ combinations had significantly effected fruit yield per plant

Punjab Beauty (T9) which was significantly higher than all (Table 2). The plants maintained under T5 treatment also other treatment except T1, T5 and T12 treatments. However, recorded highest fruit yield per plant (45.7 kg/plant) followed the minimum scion girth was observed in T10 treatment. The by T9 treatment. It was also observed that plants which had data in Table 1 further show that the overall minimum more canopy spread recorded higher fruit yields. The rootstock, inter-stock and scion girth was recorded in T10 minimum yield per plant (5.9 kg) was noted in T15 treatment. treatment among the triple combinations. While in double Iglesias and Asin (2005) observed the highest cumulative combination lowest stock and scion girth was observed in fruit yield/plant in pear cultivar conference on self-rooted

T15 treatment. In previous studies also, the stock influenced and quince rootstocks, and the lowest on seedlings of OH×F the trunk girth. Quince BA-29 rootstock produced highest 69 and EMC rootstock however, interstems did not show trunk girth of Beurre Hardy scion as compared to other any significant effect on fruit yield. Significantly highest fruit rootstocks (Carrera, 1989). Similarly, Sharma et al. (1988) weight (143.5 g) of pear cv. PUNJAB BEAUTY was recorded observed maximum Patharnakh and Baggugosha scion and from plants raised on Shiara rootstock followed by T 4 stock girth on D-4 and minimum on Quince A rootstock. treatment (Table 2). Minimum fruit weight of 109.1 g was These observations are in conformity with the findings of recorded from plants maintained under triple combination Vyvyan (1955); Nauriyal and Kanwar (1969); Carlson and of Patharnakh cutting/ Patharnakh/ Punjab Beauty. Similarly, Oh (1975); Sharma et al. (1979); Tubbs (1980); Parry (1981); Mielke et al. (2008) observed that fruit weight in Columbia Ugolik and Kantorowicz (1993) etc. who reported that both Red Anjou, Bosc and d’Anjou pear cultivars were scion and rootstock exert influence on the vigour of a significantly affected by different rootstock and interstem composite plant however, McKenzie (1956); Roger and interactions. The fruit quality parameters (firmness, TSS and Beakbane (1957) reported that the influence of a given clone acidity) are presented in Table 2. Various treatments significantly

Table 2 : Influence of different stionic combination on yield and quality characteristics of pear cv. PUNJAB BEAUTY Treatments Fruit number per plant Yield (kg/plant) Fruit weight (g) Firmness (lbs) TSS (%) Acidity (%)

T1 266 29.3 120.1 15.1 13.4 0.39

T2 154 18.2 118.0 14.3 13.8 0.38

T3 144 21.7 143.5 14.9 13.6 0.41

T4 105 13.4 127.2 16.1 13.8 0.44

T5 389 45.7 117.6 14.6 13.1 0.46

T6 287 26.5 110.5 14.6 13.2 0.36

T7 123 14.6 118.1 15.4 14.1 0.38

T8 258 27.5 112.9 13.9 13.7 0.32

T9 321 39.3 122.5 13.8 14.7 0.34

T10 80 8.2 109.1 15.2 13.1 0.38

T11 98 11.7 119.2 15.8 13.1 0.32

T12 185 22.7 122.5 14.1 12.5 0.42

T13 154 17.4 113.0 15.4 12.7 0.44

T14 109 13.5 124.3 13.6 12.9 0.36

T15 54 5.9 110.4 15.6 13.5 0.45 C.D. (P=0.05) 39.8 11.8 6.5 1.15 0.73 NS NS=Non-significant

Asian J. Hort., 9(2) Dec., 2014 : 301-304 303 Hind Agricultural Research and Training Institute P.P.S. GILL AND NAV PREM SINGH influenced the fruit firmness. The fruit firmness was recorded Kviklys, D. and Kvikliene, N. (2004). Pear rootstock effect on highest from triple combination of Kainth large fruited/ growth, productivity and fruit internal quality. Acta Hort., 658 (1): Patharnakh/ Punjab Beauty. While softer fruit texture (13.6 lbs) 359-363. was observed in T14 treatment followed by T9 treatment (13.8 Lambard, P.B. and Westwood, M.N. (1986). Pear rootstocks, lbs). The highest total soluble solids contents (14.7 %) were present and future usage. In: Pear production in the pacific Northwest, recorded in fruits harvested from plants that were grafted over 1986 Proceedings of Pacific Northwest Tree Fruit Short Course Patharnakh cuttings. This was significantly higher from all other (Willett M and Stebbins RL eds), Washington St University, pp. 2- 21. treatments, except, T7 treatment. Similarly, the lowest TSS contents (12.5 %) were registered in T12 treatment. Conference Lambard, P.B. and Westwood, M.N. (1987). Pear rootstocks. In: pear on the rootstocks viz., Quince MA, K16, K11 and 1.2 Rootstocks for fruit crops (Rom JC and Carlson RF Eds), New York, produced fruits with higher soluble solids contents, whereas, pp. 145- 183. the lowest soluble solids contents were found in fruits from plants McKenzie, D.W. (1956). Interactions between rootstocks and scions on S1 and Sydo rootstocks (Kviklys and Kvikliene, 2004). The with special reference to tissue structure and development. Ph.D. acid content of fruits was not significantly effected by any of Thesis, University of London, ENGLAND. stionic combination. However, lowest acid content (0.32 %) was Mielke, E.A., Turner, J. and Sugar, D. (2008). Pear production on noted in T8 and T11 treatments, while, the highest value was Old Home × Farmingdale (OH × F) interstem-rootstock observed in T5 treatment. Similar results were reported by Nikolic combinations. Acta Hort., 800: 645-652. (1980) in Max-Red Bartelett pear. Nauriyal, J.P. and Kanwar, J.S. (1969). Rootstock studies on From these studies, it is evident that there existed great subtropical I. Nursery behaviour of different variety in Pyrus variability among different stionic combinations with respect pashia Buch and Hami and P communis L rootstocks. Plant Sci., 1: to growth and fruiting characteristics. The T5, T9 treatments 210-215. had shown greater vegetative growth and higher fruit yield while Nikolic, M. (1980). Comparative pomological-technological treatments with lesser vegetative growth also recorded lower characteristics of yellow and red Bartlett pears grafted on seedling yields. and Quince A rootstocks. Jugoslovensko Vocarstvo., 14: 199-204. REFERENCES North, M.S. and Cook, N.C. (2008). Effect of six rootsocks on ‘Forelle’ pear tree growth, production, fruit quality and leaf mineral Bajwa, M.S., Singh, A. and Sharma, K.K. (1972). The effect of content. Acta Hort., 772: 97-103. rootstock on the growth of pear. In: Compte Rendeu du Symposium ‘Culture du Poiren’ 4-8 Sept., pp. 315-318. Parry, M.S. (1981). Trials of dwarfing quince rootstocks with comice and conference pears. J. Hort. Sci., 56(2): 139-143. Bajwa, M.S., Singh, A. and Sharma, K.K. (1974). The effect of rootstock on the growth of pear ( L.). J. Res. PAU, Reil, W.O. (1990). Pear rootstocks. In: Pear growing in the1990’s : 11: 132-134. Proceedings University of CA Short Course, Kelseyville (Beutel J and Elkins R Eds) University of California, 7: 1-6. Carrera, M. (1989). Performance of autumn and winter pear varieties in the middle Ebro Basin. Acta Hort., 256 : 35-41. Sharma, K.K., Brar, S.S., Rehalia, A.S. and Jawanda, J.S. (1979). Leaf composition and tree volume of pear cultivars on two Carlson, R.F. and Oh, S.D. (1975). Influence of interstem lengths rootstocks. Punjab Hort. J., 19 (3-4): 125-129. of M8 clone Malus sylvestris Mill on growth, precocity, yield and spacing of 2 apple cultivars. J. American Soc.Hort. Sci., 100(5): Sharma, R.C., Dhillon, D.S. and Grewal, G.P.S. (1988). 450-452. Prebearing performance of pear on different rootstocks. Punjab Hort. J., 28: 44-46. Chaplin, M.H., Westwood, M.N. and Roberts, A.N. (1972). Effect of rootstock on leaf content of Italian prunes (Prunus domestica L.). Tubbs, F.R. (1980). Growth relations of rootstock and scion in apple. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci., 97 (5): 641-644. J. Hort. Sci., 55 (2): 181-189. Cheema, H.S. and Singh, B. (1990). A User’s Manual to CPCSI. Ugolik, M. and Kantorowicz, B.M. (1993). Effect of rootstock on Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana. 40pp. growth, yield and mineral element content in apple leaves. Prace-z- Zakresu-Nauk-Rolniczyth, 75:161-169. Iglesias, I. and Asin, L. (2005). Performance of ‘Conference’ pear on self rooted trees and several Old Home × Farmingdale, seedling Vyvyan, M.C. (1955). Inter-relation of scion and rootstock in fruit and Quince rootstock in Spain. Acta Hort., 671: 485-591. trees. Annl. Botany 19: 401-423. Kaundal, G.S., Sandhu, A.S. and Deol, I.S. (1989). Effect of Westwood, M.N., Cameron, H.R., Lombard, P.B. and Cordy, rootstock and scion size on grafting success and nursery performance C.B. (1971). Effect of trunk and rootstock on decline, growth and of pear cultivars. J. Res. Punjab Agric. Univ., 26 (2): 217-221. performance of pear. J. Amer. Soc. Hort. Sci., 96 (2): 147-150. th Year  of Excellence9 

Asian J. Hort., 9(2) Dec., 2014 : 301-304 304 Hind Agricultural Research and Training Institute