SCIENTIFIC WORKS OF THE LITHUANIAN INSTITUTE OF
HORTICULTURE AND LITHUANIAN UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE.
SODININKYSTË IR DARÞININKYSTË. 2007. 26(3).
YIELD AND FRUIT QUALITY OF FIFTEEN APPLE
CULTIVARS
Audrius SASNAUSKAS, Dalia GELVONAUSKIENË,
Pranas VIÐKELIS
Lithuanian Institute of Horticulture, LT–54333, Babtai, Kaunas distr., Lithuania.
E-mail: [email protected]
Yield, harvesting time, storage life, quality and biochemical composition of fruits of
15 new apple (Malus domestica Mill.) cultivars were studied at the Lithuanian Institute of
Horticulture in 2002–2006. Trees were grafted on M.26 rootstock at a spacing of 4 × 2 m.
The best cultivar, according to the whole complex of traits, was ‘Teremok’. The
following apple cultivars were distinguished for particular characteristics: ‘Teremok’,
‘Ciganochka’, ‘Auksis’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’ and ‘Honeycrisp’– for yield; ‘Auksis’, ‘Caravel’
and ‘Elegia’ – for highest class of fruits; ‘Ciganochka’ and ‘Radogost’ – for storage life;
‘Charles Ross’, ‘Teremok’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’ and ‘Ausma’ – for fruit weight; ‘Auksis’ and
‘Teremok’ – for high fruit quality; ‘Elegia’– for biochemical composition; ‘Caravel’ – for
best output of apple juice; ‘Ornament’ – for firmness of apple skin; ‘Perlina Kijeva’– for
firmness of apple flesh.
Key words: apple, cultivars, quality of fruits, productivity.
Introduction. Fruit yield and quality has recently become more and more
important for both consumers and producers. Fruit quality includes not only visual
and gustatory, but also health promoting properties, which reduce the risk of several
serious chronic diseases, such as cancer, coronary heart disease, type II diabetes
(World Cancer Research Fund, 1997) and food safety characteristics. Consumer
studies are generally aimed at determining the opinions and preferences of consumers
with a view to introduce new cultivars into the market (Stainer et al., 1996; Sansavini,
2006, Palara and Colombo, 2006) and evaluate the acceptation of particular aspects
related with fruit quality (Durner et al., 1992; Zanela, 2006).
Intensive research on the productivity and fruit quality at the Lithuanian Institute
of Horticulture was carried out more than twenty years ago (Bandaravièius et al.,
2000). Some cultivars responded differently to climatic conditions than others (Blaþek
and Varga, 2001; Sasnauskas et al., 2005; Sasnauskas et al., 2006).
The objective of this study was to evaluate yield and fruit quality in fifteen
introduced apple cultivars.
Materials and methods. T r i a l y e a r s a n d p l a c e. The trial, which
involved 15 apple cultivars, was planted at the Lithuanian Institute of Horticulture in
the spring of 2002. Trees were grafted on M.26 rootstock. Evaluation and
characterization of the cultivars and hybrids was performed in 2004–2006. Before
"'
orchard bare fallow was maintained where weeds were controlled mechanically and
with herbicides.
M e t e o r o l o g i c a l c o n d i t i o n s. Temperature is the most important factor
determining apple yield, particularly minimal temperatures in winter and spring. In
2002–2003 the temperature in December (5°C) and February (1.7°C) was lower,
while in 2003–2004 the temperature in December (1.9°C) and February (2.5°C) was
higher than multiannual value. During years of investigations the late spring frost at
the beginning of bloom injured blossoms. At this time the minimal air temperature
above the ground dropped from -0.3°C to -4.9°C, what injured fruit settings.
P l a n t m a t e r i a l. The following introduced apple cultivars were compared
with the standard cv. ‘Auksis’ (Lithuania): ‘Ausma’ (Latvia), ‘Caravel’ (Canada),
‘Charles Ross’ (United Kingdom), ‘Ciganochka’ (Ukraine), ‘Elegia’ (Ukraine),
‘Greensleeves’ (United Kingdom), ‘Honeycrisp’ (USA), ‘Katre’ (Estonia), ‘Katerina’
(Ukraine), ‘Ornament’ (Ukraine), ‘Perlina Kijeva’ (Ukraine), ‘Radogost’ (Ukraine),
‘Teremok’ (Ukraine) and ‘Velte’ (Latvia).
E x p e r i m e n t a l d e s i g n. The trees were planted at the distance of 4 × 2 m.
The trial was established in five replications. Each plot contained 1 fruit-tree. They
were formed as spindle. Growing, fertilizing, pest, disease and weed control, soil
cultivation, pruning, shaping and care of apple cultivars and promising hybrids were
maintained as recommended for commercial orchards.
O b s e r v a t i o n s a n d s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s. The observations on fruits
and trees have been done according to the standards used by the EUFRIN working
group on apple and pear cultivar evaluation. In the trial the following characters of
apple hybrids and cultivars was established: yield, t ha-1; classification of fruits
according to diameter, %; dates of harvesting time and storage life; fruit weight, g;
quality of fruits, scores; biochemical compositions, %; output of apple juice, %;
firmness of apple skin and flesh, N/cm2. All data were subjected to analysis of variance.
The significance of differences between the cultivars and hybrids was estimated at
0.05 level (Fisher’s Protected LSD and Duncan’s Multiple Range Test).
Results. Y i e l d. Apple trees of cv. ‘Teremok’ (7.72 t ha-1) and ‘Honeycrisp’
(9.34 t ha-1) produced a higher yield in the third year in orchard, while trees of
cv. ‘Caravel’ (0.16 t ha-1) and ‘Katerina’ (0.28 t ha-1) bear fruits lower (Fig. 1).
In the fourth year in orchard apple trees of cv. ‘Auksis’ (24.8 t ha-1) produced a
higher yield, while cv. ‘Ornament’ (3.5 t ha-1) produced a lower. In the fifth year of
apple tree growth in orchard apple trees produced a higher yield. The cumulative
yield of 5 years of apple cultivars ranged from 14.4 to 58.6 t ha-1. Cvs. ‘Teremok’
(58.6 t ha-1), ‘Ciganochka’ (42.9 t ha-1), ‘Auksis’ (41.8 t ha-1), ‘Perlina Kijeva’
(41.5 t ha-1) and ‘Honeycrisp’ (40.2 t ha-1) produced the highest yield. Cvs. ‘Katre’
(14.4 t ha-1), ‘Charles Ross’ (15.6 t ha) and ‘Velte’ (18.2 t ha-1) had the lowest yield.
Average yield of apple cultivars ranged from 4.8 to 19.5 t ha-1 in 2004–2006
(Fig. 2). Cvs. ‘Katre’ (4.8 t ha-1), ‘Charles Ross’ (5.2 t/ha) and ‘Velte’ (6.1 t ha-1)
produced a lower, while ‘Teremok’ (19.5 t ha-1), ‘Ciganochka’ (14.3 t ha-1), ‘Auksis’
(13.9 t ha-1), ‘Perlina Kijeva’ (13.8 t ha-1) and ‘Honeycrisp’ (13.4 t ha-1) produced
the highest yield.
#
F i g. 1. Cumulative yield of apple cultivars (t ha-1)
1 p a v. Suminis obelø veisliø vaisiø derlius, t ha-1
Babtai, 2004–2006
F i g. 2. Average yield of apple cultivars (t ha-1)
2 p a v. Vidutinis kiekvienø tyrimo metø obelø veisliø vaisiø derlius, t ha-1
Babtai, 2004–2006
Classification of fruits according to diameter established that cvs. ‘Auksis’,
‘Caravel’ and ‘Elegia’ produced fruits of the highest class (Table 1). 1 and 2 classes
of apples ranged between 2–32%. Cvs. ‘Katerina’ and ‘Radogost’ produced not
specific fruits.
#
T a b l e 1 . Classification of fruits according to diameter (%)
1 l e n t e l ë. Vaisiø suskirstymas á klases pagal skersmená, %
Babtai, 2005–2006
S t o r a g e l i f e. The earliest picking of fruits had cv. ‘Auksis’ (09-14) and
‘Velte’ (09-17), latest – cv. ‘Charles Ross’ (09-30) (Table 2).
T a b l e 2. Harvest date, end of storage and fruit quality parameters of
apple cultivars
2 l e n t e l ë. Obelø vaisiø skynimo laikas, laikymosi pabaiga ir kokybës rodikliai
Babtai, 2004–2006
#
Data of cold storage durability show that fruits of cvs. ‘Ciganochka’ (05-20)
and ‘Radogost’ (05-10) may be stored longer. Cvs. ‘Caravel’ (12-05), ‘Perlina Kijeva’
(12-15) and ‘Honeycrisp’ (12-29) were distinguished for short time of storage life.
Q u a l i t y p a r a m e t e r s. All cultivars demonstrated intermediate (5–6.9
scores) good (7–7.5 scores) and extremely good (more than 7.5 scores) fruit
appearance. Cvs. ‘Honeycrisp’ (7.7 score), ‘Charles Ross’, ‘Ciganochka’ and ‘Perlina
Kijeva’ (7.6 score) produced extremely good appearance (Table 2).
Fruits of cvs. ‘Auksis’ (7.6 score) and ‘Teremok’ (7.5 score) had very good
taste. Cv. ‘Caravel’ (5.6 score) had intermediate fruit taste. Fruit taste of other cultivars
ranged between 7–7.4 scores.
Results of organoleptic evaluation show that fruits of cvs. ‘Auksis’ (7.6 score)
and ‘Teremok’ (7.5 score) had very good quality (general estimate – involves taste
and appearance). Other cultivars and hybrids had good quality (7.0–7.4 scores),
except cv. ‘Caravel’ (5.6 score).
The largest fruits produced cvs. ‘Charles Ross’ (201.3 g), ‘Teremok’ (163 g),
‘Perlina Kijeva’ (163.3 g) and ‘Ausma’ (170 g), while smallest – cv. ‘Caravel’ (111.6 g).
C h e m i c a l c o m p o s i t i o n. The highest amount of soluble solids was
established in apple cv. ‘Elegia’ (13.8%), while essentially lower – in cv. ‘Caravel’
(9.0%) and cv. ‘Teremok’ (9.2%) (Table 3). The amount of titratable acidity of all
cultivars and hybrids varied from 0.20 to 1.05. Dry matter content in apples ranged
from 12.9 to 15.6%. Reliable differences in this parameter were between
cv. ‘Honeycrisp’ and cv. ‘Perlina Kijeva’.
T a b l e 3. Biochemical characteristics of apple cultivars (%)
3 l e n t e l ë. Obuoliø cheminë sudëtis, %
#!
Babtai, 2005–2006
Output of apple juice varied from 66.9% (‘Auksis’) to 79.1% (‘Caravel’) (Fig. 3).
Cvs. ‘Elegia’, ‘Honeycrisp’, ‘Katre’, ‘Ornament’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’, ‘Radogost’ and
‘Teremok’ had 70.1–73.3% of apple juice.
F i g. 3. Output of apple juice (%)
3 p a v. Obuoliø sulèiø iðeiga, %
Babtai, 2005–2006
F i g. 4. Firmness of apple skin (N/cm2)
4 p a v. Obuoliø þievelës tvirtumas, N/cm2
Babtai, 2005–2006
#"
Firmness of apple skin ranged between cultivars. Most thin skin was
observed on fruits of cvs. ‘Teremok’ (241 N/cm 2), ‘Auksis’ (271 N/cm 2) and
‘Velte’ (273 N/cm2). On the other hand, most thick skin had fruits of cvs. ‘Caravel’
(397 N/cm2), ‘Radogost’ (398 N/cm2) and ‘Ornament’ (425 N/cm2) (Fig. 4).
F i g. 5. Firmness of apple flesh (N/cm2)
5 p a v. Obuoliø minkðtimo tvirtumas, N/cm2
Babtai, 2005–2006
Fruits of cvs. ‘Ausma’ (101 N/cm2), ‘Ciganochka’ (107.5 N/cm2) and ‘Perlina
Kijeva’ (108.7 N/cm2) had most firm flesh, while ‘Velte’ (72.6 N/cm2), ‘Teremok’
(73.8 N/cm2) and ‘Auksis’ (77.1 N/cm2) had most soft flesh (Fig. 5).
Discussion. Our data show that different genotypes might have different strategy
for productivity. During five years in orchard apple trees of cvs. ‘Teremok’,
‘Ciganochka’, ‘Auksis’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’ and ‘Honeycrisp’ produced the highest yield.
Most unproductive were apple trees of ‘Katre’, ‘Charles Ross’ and ‘Velte’.
Quality is usually defined in terms of all of the characteristics of the food that
lead a consumer to be satisfied with the product (Harker et al., 2003). The concept
of quality can be studied from different perspectives; that of the consumer, or of the
producer and the fruit industry (Molina et al., 2006). Establishing the optimum harvest
date is an important factor in obtaining quality fruits. The best way to provide
customers with good quality apples is therefore to select the most appropriate harvest
date to guarantee consumer acceptance (Streif, 1996). The earliest harvest of fruits
had cv. ‘Auksis’ and ‘Velte’, the latest – cv. ‘Charles Ross’. A long storage life is the
most important factor in deciding, which cultivars are to be grown in a commercial
orchard. The investigation shows that fruit of cvs. ‘Ciganochka’ and ‘Radogost’
can be stored longer.
##
To apple growers, fruit size is strongly correlated with profits (Salvador et al.,
2006). Size, together with shape and color, is one of the most important fruit quality
characteristics to consumers (Schotzko, 1985). In our trial cv. ‘Charles Ross’,
‘Teremok’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’ and ‘Ausma’ produced the largest fruits.
Appearance, taste and texture are quality attribute that is critical in determining
the acceptability of apple fruits by consumers (Jaeger et al., 1998). During the
investigation period all fruit quality parameters were specific for each tested cultivars
and depended on the year. Results of organoleptic evaluation show that fruits of
cv. ‘Auksis’ and ‘Teremok’ had better appearance and taste. Dry soluble solids,
titratable acidity and dry matter are associated with taste. The best chemical
composition was found in fruits of cv. ‘Elegia’. The best output of apple juice had
‘Caravel’. The firmest skin had fruits of cv. ‘Ornament’, the firmest flesh –
cv. ‘Perlina Kijeva’.
Based on the results from the present study, the most valuable cultivar was
‘Teremok’.
Conclusions. 1. The best cultivar, according to the whole complex of traits,
was ‘Teremok’.
2. The following apple cultivars were distinguished for particular characteristics:
‘Teremok’, ‘Ciganochka’, ‘Auksis’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’ and ‘Honeycrisp’ – for yield;
‘Auksis’, ‘Caravel’ and ‘Elegia’ – for highest class of fruits; ‘Ciganochka’ and
‘Radogost’ – for storage life; ‘Charles Ross’, ‘Teremok’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’ and
‘Ausma’ – for fruit weight; ‘Auksis’ and ‘Teremok’ – for high fruit quality; ‘Elegia’ –
for biochemical composition; ‘Caravel’ – for best output of apple juice; ‘Ornament’ –
for firmness of apple skin; ‘Perlina Kijeva’ – for firmness of apple flesh.
Gauta 2007 06
Parengta spausdinti 2007 06
References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
B a n d a r a v i è i u s A., G e l v o n a u s k i e n ë D., S a s n a u s k a s A.
Evaluation of apple cultivars // Estonian agricultural university. Proceedings of
the international conference Fruit production and fruit breeding. Tartu, 2000.
Vol. 207. P. 94–98.
B l a þ e k J., Va r g a A. Tree vigour of new apple cultivars grown in the Czech
Republic and some factors influencing it // Hort. Sci. 2001. 28(4). P. 130–137.
D u r n e r E. F., P o l k D. F., G o f f r e d a J. C. Low-input apple production
systems: consumer acceptance of disease-resistant cultivars // Hortcience. 1992.
27(2). P. 177–179.
H a r k e r F. R., G u n s o n F. A., J a e g e r S. R. The case for fruit quality:
an interpretative review of consumer attitudes and preferences for apples //
Postharvest biol. tech. 2003. 28. P. 333–347.
J a e g e r S. R., A n d a n i Z., W a k e l i n g I. N., M a c F i e H. J. H.,
E l l e k j a e r M. R. Instrumental and sensory analysis of fresh Norwegian and
imported apples // Food qual. pref. 1998. 9(5). P. 355–366.
#$
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
M o l i n a D., A l e g r e S ., C a s e r o T., C a s a l s M., B o n a n y J.,
C a r b o J., P u y J., R e c a s e n s I. Quality indexes for ‘Golden Smoothee’
apples in relation to consumer evaluation // Journal of fruit and ornamental plant
research. 2006. 14(2). P. 39–51.
P a l a r a U., C o l o m b o R. La rivincita delle mele di pianura // Ortofrutta il
prodotto, i produttori il mercato Italiana. 2006. 9. P. 45–54.
S a l v a d o r F. R., F i s i c h e l l a M., F o n t a n a r i M. Correlations between
fruit size and fruit quality in apple trees wit high and standard crop load levels //
Journal of fruit and ornamental plant research. 2006. 14(2). P. 113–122.
S a n s a v i n i S. The situation of new varieties under patent protection: global
alliances for propagation rights and trademarks // Obstbau weinbau. 2006. 43(10).
P. 288–289.
S c h o t z k o T. Fruit size-the money maker // Proc. hort. ass. Wash. State 81
st annual meeting. December. 1985. P. 92–96.
S a s n a u s k a s A., G e l v o n a u s k i e n ë D., G e l v o n a u s k i s B.,
D u c h o v s k i s P., V i ð k e l i s P., Ð i k s n i a n i e n ë J. B., B o b i n a s È.,
Ð a b a j e v i e n ë G. Evaluation of new introduced apple cultivars // Fruit
science. 2005. 222. P. 20–25.
S a s n a u s k a s A., G e l v o n a u s k i e n ë D., D u c h o v s k i s P.,
Ð i k ð n i a n i e n ë J. B., Ð a b a j e v i e n ë G. Introdukuotø obelø veisliø
biologinës savybës // Sodininkystë ir darþininkystë. Babtai, 2006. 25(1).
P. 3–12.
S t a i n e r R., G i u l i a n i G., Y o u s e f f J., T o f f o l u t t i B. Qualitative
characteristics and consumer assessment of new apple cultivars // Rivista di
frutticoltura e di ortofloricoltura. 1996. 58(11). P. 43–46.
S t r e i f J. Optimum harvest date for different apple cultivar in the ‘Bodensee’
area // In A. De Jager, D. Johnson, E. Hohn (ed). Determination and prediction
of optimum harvest date of apples and pears. COST 94. European Commission.
Luxembourg, 1996. P. 15–20.
World Cancer Research Fund. Food, nutrition and the prevention of cancer: a
global perspective // American Institute for Cancer Research. 1997. Washington,
DC.
Z a n e l a A. Conventional and innovative techniques for the analysis of interior
quality of apples // Obstbau weinbau. 2006. 43(10). P. 292–293.
SODININKYSTË IR DARÞININKYSTË. MOKSLO DARBAI. 2007. 26(3).
PENKIOLIKOS OBELØ VEISLIØ DERLIUS IR VAISIØ KOKYBË
A. Sasnauskas, D. Gelvonauskienë, P. Viðkelis
Santrauka
2002–2006 m. Lietuvos sodininkystës ir darþininkystës institute tirta penkiolikos
introdukuotø obelø veisliø derlius, skynimo laikas, laikymosi pabaiga, vaisiø kokybë ir
biocheminë sudëtis. Dvimeèiai obelø sodinukai su M.26 poskiepiu pasodinti 2002 m.
#%
pavasará. Sodinimo schema – 4 × 2 m, po vienà vaismedá laukelyje penkiais pakartojimais.
Ávertinus poþymiø visumà, nustatyta, kad vertingiausia buvo veislë ‘Teremok’. Tirtais
poþymiais iðsiskyrë ðios obelø veislës: ‘Teremok’, ‘Ciganochka’, ‘Auksis’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’
ir ‘Honeycrisp’ – derliumi; ‘Auksis’, ‘Caravel’ ir ‘Elegia’ – aukðèiausios klasës vaisiais;
‘Ciganochka’ ir ‘Radogost’ – iðsilaikymo trukme; ‘Charles Ross’, ‘Teremok’, ‘Perlina Kijeva’
ir ‘Ausma’ – vaisiø mase; ‘Auksis’ ir ‘Teremok’ – vaisiø kokybe; ‘Elegia’ – biochemine
sudëtimi; ‘Caravel’ – sulèiø iðeiga; ‘Ornament’ – þievelës tvirtumu; ‘Perlina Kijeva’ –
minkðtimo tvirtumu.
Reikðminiai þodþiai: derlius, obelys, vaisiø kokybë, veislës.
#&