53 1
1401 ) 128 - 117
( DOI: 10.22059/ijhs.2021.308459.1836
* Corresponding author E-mail:[email protected]
:
!
"#$ %
1
( ) *
2
1 . ! " # $ % & ' ( ) *+
% , % ! " #
2 .
! " # ! " # $ % .# / 0 *+
% , %
:23 4 )
10 / 6 / 1399 - :!% <= 4 18
/ 3 / 1400 (
+ ,-
A % B " "C
* (
& A
% A D
= E (
%F GH + I
HJ K 0 L
%M N .2 A %
)O 0% F (
P "
) QP " E = "H %
H =
"
2F R%F E
10 S
, . F %
E = N 0 ) T %UHK' F %=
62 E = V W . " (20 X%)"H
"H = %( " = 8
/ 0 0 Y ZW[ . "
* # =
E 2F 09 / 19 E E 62
/ 11 E \" N % ] U %
2F 0 "F E E
] % E * 600 800 EH\
* $3 U(
"F A . % * N ^ B"J "C
"H = %( " = E = ] % N + 100
. E0%^ + %_ E 0 E^%) " \ F (
E
"
E . `0 F 0 (
* # =
2F 23 / 0
\ E 67 / 0
\ %( 2F % ] . "
A" . " %b I "H = 2F (
% A c' E )
] % 6 / 7 X%) 8 / 5
\ e \ 2 "= (
% % T 2F % `0 F
) 64 / 1 F ( [ A" Q
( 4= QUF E
% Z +M 2 "=
% ) 35 / 0 H (%
N Q J 2 "=
% f
E ) ] % 7 / 8 25 62 6 / 28
\ F ( . E 0 H "
2F A"
( % %( g 2 L E T %UHK'
Zh
%
. F % =
+.
: (
. (
% E 2 A" 2 L %UHK' 2F % .
Vegetative and reproductive characteristics of Miyagawa Satsuma mandarin on Swingle citrumelo in alluvial and piedmont-plain of East Mazandaran
Negin Akhlaghi Amiri1* and Ali Asadi Kangarshahi2
1. Assistant Professor, Horticulture Crops Research Department, Mazandaran Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Sari, Iran
2. Assistant Professor, Soil and Water Department, Mazandaran Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Sari, Iran
(Received: Aug. 31, 2020- Accepted: Jun. 08, 2021)
ABSTRACT
Today, the existence of various biotic and abiotic stresses has necessitated research with different rootstocks in different climatic and soil conditions. So, the growth trend and some characteristics of Miyagawa Satsuma mandarin on Swingle citrumelo rootstock in alluvial and piedmont plain in East Mazandaran during 10 years were evaluated. The results showed that the trees on this rootstock were vigorous and had high yield (62 kg per tree). The affinity of scion and rootstock in both locations was 0.8. The tree canopy volume at the end of the experiment was 19.09 in alluvial and 11.62 m3 in piedmont plain. So it is recommended to increase the number of alluvial and piedmont plain trees to more than 600 and 800 plants/hectare, respectively. Despite several frost stresses during 10 years, the survival of rootstock and scion compound was 100% in both locations, however, the piedmont trees entered the alternate bearing cycle as at the end of the experiment, the trees alternate bearing index was 0.23% in alluvial and 0.67% in piedmont plain. The best harvest time for both locations was early October. Fruits of the alluvial plain had more weight and extract (7.6 g and 5.8 %), smoother peel, and higher harvest index (1.64 units); In contrast, fruits of the piedmont was more oblate and had thicker peel (0.35 mm) and higher peel weight, sugar, total acid and vitamin C (8.7, 25, 62 and 28.6 %, respectively). In general, the trees in alluvial location had higher visual quality fruits and a more regular and stable annual yield.
Keywords: Alternate bearing, frost resistance, fruit quality, harvest time, yield.
0
! ," 5 63!"
# 738 / ( 0 /
# -.
" 9 : $
;/ - < 3="
( , >!"
(
"
? -.- 5 @ AB!
@ (
+ - >'
# C
"CD"
(
@ ( 3'". E
/ (
"
F$ G (
08
; : 3' ," 5 63!"
$ . )
Castle, 2010
.(
0( / 0H 0E (" 7# IJ "
J $ -K.L 7 $ M" N" . < O3-" G "
. " G P .! 1#8- 3/
" Q ' 0( / R#
.>8#- A! $ S % " 0 ( TL $ 0 FUJ
# M F
- 5 S V-"
# 0( / 0 >!" 5 " : +-
E(C#D W23O$ X(" M B $ Y ' ( # #
Z! / J 63$
$ : +- >% ( 0V#3-
Y ' X(" " 0( / [( 3 < O3-" (, " S V-" ", \" " X#U$
)
Akhlaghi Amiri,
2019; Bassal, 2009; Georgiou, 2002
.(
0( / #N J
0B = ," #8 (, 5," -" 02 = ," #?.J
] J Y -.#/ ), ! E2 ^ 0 1 UJ C#-
# .
"
$ 0( / [# _ . 7 -".J
"; #N J 5.#$ >#6# 7 > " : $, - " 0( $ ! >+) (, #N J .3 D [("
(Akhlaghi Amiri, 2020; Hardy, 2004; Castle, 1995)
. / S V-" ," `
# . - ( a E 0b "
3 %
# [ / ( 0 /
# -.
$ 1E )
# -. H .
` 0 c- VJ
(affinity)
X#U$ >B8- 0
>!" 0( / Y -.#/ 0 J 38
c- VJ 0= . "
cE^ 0 038 "
1 `?"
D
# C ( d.?.
# [ / ( 0 /
# -.
`3$ 1$".^ 0 .' 0 >!"
M 6J 02 = ,"
5 : 3' ! >D /
( 0 /
# -.
"(
X U$
# b D
# :.$ . .3 38
"
0B =
# d.?.38
!
# d.?.3
# .
#
# ( 7
' :P
# 1 ) >!"
Jianhua & Weifu, 2005
.(
^ 0 c- VJ ^ 0H (
a C- ( a J c- VJ
# [ / ( 0 /
# -.
K ) >!" J
Bisio et al., 2003
.(
- - 7`L b^ : !P : >!./ 1#? 0
0(;eJ 3$&! ".' [# _ <";=
"
A! $
5, J ",
38 .'
0 >B8- 3+# fb!
#- 6#? M B $ >+ TL $ ( M B $ 5 " I3'" .' 0 #!P 0-" 3( $ . -"
- = #?.J g ! [# g FJ /
2000 J 2014 :"C#$ 0 3
/ 12
- - " M $ [# Q ," @#
2 / 22
Q
>!" 03D ( @("CD"
(FAO, 2016)
- - .
$.8J !
(Satsuma)
.+-" (
(Citrus unshiu)
a(
:P " B$ .>!" M B $ >!./ : !P ; : 0-.) 0FBL .>!" [#H - J
.>!" "CV$ 0-.) a(
0FBL .>!" - - 0-.) ," 5 ) a( 1 (.!
[( # ," E( :P 5.#$
-" [( J . 3D M B $ i"
W#b?
j <
. .>!" 5 - TL $ " .+-"
: 38$, " 0 ! 2#'
1 UJ ( M B $
5 (" >8#- (;/
38 gP 0 -P 1ID ( ?
% 5.#$ J S ) D ,
>#6# -P k
' -. #?.J <.
(Anderson & Ferguson; 2015)
.
5.#$
<.L $ #8$ ) 0 #- TL $ 0 (
$ [(" ," 1B%
0 ##eJ : +3!./ l-
' >#6#
. ' "
. - "
>#6# J B^ 0 .
- - [(" VJ 2'"
," 1B%
(" ,CB!
$ 1$ - # \&3'" " .' g m$ .
$ <.8U$ d.?.(C#D VJ G.2 . -.
[(" ,"
% >B8- #!" 0
(TSS/TA)
: $, > "
J B3`$ n' , >!" >!./ l- 0 >B8-
(
"
eJ
##
M"
$
" 0 038 (
X > .L M " o 0=
U$
# X
" >!./ l- 0`!.J
$ p 6J 3D"
(Iglesias
et al., 2007)
. n'
" G.2 - - S % "
$ -".J TBL
7% IF$ ", 0Fb $
0qo&$ 1 % M 6J "
n' . 03 "
2Q"
" - 3!" 1$ G.2 2%" o
"
# 6
#
>
$
# 5.
g.2U$ $ = ".$ 1 5 I^ Q 1$
0= ) ( cE ) > " n' (
TSS/TA
+O (
$ fb! ,"
# 5.
J l- 0
# r
# a : +- " 7%
$
(Unece standard, 2017)
. ( ," E M&E+$
M B $ S % " ," s`
- - 02 = ,"
.+-"
1E+$
< J .>!"
: 3' [("
g !
- #?.J q $ g.IU$ ?".3$
E2 ^ . K
g ! 7 #8 E2 ^ 5" tK. `$ g ! a(
JP .>!"
u%"
" " >' g.IU$ / g !
>!" aH. 5.#$ (, " `J 5.#$ [("
0 >2^
D I3%" .! ," A! $ 8/ ", :" FD
38#- " .' 7 g ! ( \ L,"
g.IU$
#8 5 1#E+J 5.#$ " `J Y -"
5.#$ 5," -"
o ," @#
>
5.#$ >!./
[+' 7#Ow
>!"
38 A! $ 8/ ", % D 7 , [("
)
Monselise & Goldschmidt, 1982
.(
0 '" " ," .2$ 3#! 1 (.! 0( / 1980
0
E2 ^ M B $ "C38( J k ( 0 >$ F$ 1#?
" ( .2D :P 5 -.#/ 7% <.' >#6# K 0 X!" " ," . x("
1990 0( / [(" >#! 8o
Y ' .I' 0 K pH
K > .L (
k :"C#$
fb! a( C- (, . nO+$ Y '
$ <.' " 3 " 0( / [(" 7% o".- [("
," ` ? 7
- 5 @ :P C#O2Q o M % g !
$ g" , 0 i 03D (
(Stover et al., 2002)
.
.2$ 3#! 1 (.!
1 UJ 1 UJ X!.3$ E+' 0
. " (K $ ! 0 : 3'
y C / :P
E2 ^ :P ( -".J . - " (7% 0 038 ) K J X!.3$
0-"C' .>!" <.' >' 5.#$ " - "
0( / "
.>!K &!.- Q .%
0( / [("
5.#$
K 5 I^ ( X!.3$ #!" K TSS
$ #?.J 5.#$ .
: #$ :P k ( J k
$ K ( F$ 0 . -.
# P <P Y ' (" 2
," 3+# :P . 0 1 UJ ? >!" k 8o y x- 3#! ( J 1m$ k #8-./ (
.>!" 5 z "C) x- 3#! C(
Y '
$ : +- , 2 K a P Y ' .
k
," 3+#
30 - 25 Q
$ U$ 0+(
. .
' " .2$ 3#!
Y @# # P ! [# !
.>!" A! $ - o ,"
(Hardy, 2004)
0( / [(" .
>!" $P - W#`w @E , 2o ! TL $
(Castle et al., 2011)
@ " -" 2) +( $,P .
0(;eJ 0 .2$ 3#! 1 (.! 0( / .+-" - - "
Y ' z "C) ! :" -, $ p E P
Y ' 0( / [(" 0 ," 3+# 1 a P
14 ," 3+# g `D a P 5
Q <.! 1#? 0
g.2! >!&/./P [ P y
@ 0+(
:P E(d.?.(C#D : $ -"
>8#- 0#Q.J 1 % )
Asadi
Kangarshahi & Akhlaghi Amiri, 2017
( . 15 ' X(" 0( / :". ^ 0 M B $ {#J.-d
Y
0 -P 1 UJ [##`J " E P -" P E P , 2
y 1#D 2 x( 3- TBL . - ! 0# J #8 .2$ 3#! 1 (.! 0( / y [ P , 2 k #F$
. (
(Meral et al., 2015)
.
! : $ -"
E2 ^
# 6
#
>
8 ?" g FJ / 5 I^
# / ( 0
g " g ! x / 0 " : +- W23O$
$
# 5.
] J E2 ^ : $ -"
# 6
#
>
$
# 5.
0( / 0
"CD"
(
@
"CD" >' [!
(
@ (
>D
? 1o" $
` / E2 ^ : $ -"
( 0 .!
( 1
!
# .2$ 3
# 3+
F ,"
# 0 / ( 0 ) .
Zekri, 2008
$,P .(
( +
,(
1 - - : 3' .+-"
"
# .83 /
( 0
.!
( 1
!
# .2$ 3 / >+ 0 >B8- (
0 (
# 3+
( [
- " : +- " E2 ^ .
# 3+
( [ \&3'"
# [ 0 J b%
/ ( 0 /
# -.
/ ( 0 .!
( 1
!
# .2$ 3 ( 5
)
Tazima et al., 2013
.(
` VJ E2 ^ )
1994 J
1998 ( - - .+-"
k , (
" $ /
( 0
!
# .2$ 3
# 3+
/ @ ,"
( 0
$,P .$
(
@ (
- . [/"d
# C
$
# 5.
- - "
( [ / ( 0
# 3+
( [
( cE 3 " " 5 I^
: 3' . 2$ 3#!
.
>B8- S" -" a+' :, .
0+( 0 ("
77 / 1 . 0
J a+' 5 $ 1 A! 3$ - " F$ 5 : +- .
u(,
.>!" >' ( $" -" 5 M % 0( / ?
E2 ^
#$ >#6#
. " 0( / [( 3 0( / [(" 5
[# ," 7% [("
7 D `$ 5 @( $,P 0( /
)
Noda et al., 2001
.(
N"
14 y C3 !.3D 0( /
a( : 3' C3 !.3D M" #?.J u(,.J 0? !
$ ( =.! .+-"
7#! 3/ " F$ . !
y : 3' ," 3+# [#( / E2 ^ : 3'
$ 0(CVJ 5.#$ 7#! 3/ " (, . g.IU$ / . .
38B .= y 7#! 3/ E2 ^ [# 6 $
0+( a #! .> "
0( / S" -" JK >B8-
$ @ 0+( 0 (".
( a #! 1 ^ 1 F$
> 8%
$ @("CD" >B8- 0 (".
H . ( . :
3 0+( >!" JK -P >B8- [(" 0 - 3' >#? `D -P 0+( - " 3+# (". S" -"
$ [(" . " JK d.?.(C#D
>6) :".J 0
0( / J z "C) . - N.$ C3 !.3D MK.IU$ u(,.
E#? # >(" 0 5 0+(
38B
g BJ ( F$ #F38$
CO2
y M B $
[(" . "
0+( W( |
$ >#D | [# _ ."
>!" N.$ : 3' :P u(,.J C3 !.3D
(Morinaga & Ikeda 1990)
.
0( / ), ! 0+( ) " / 738#!
Y ' 0 M B $ W23O$
$ W23O$ >D M 63
0( / (" [(" .>!"
(". <P X("
.>!" M 63$ C#- W23O$ ' #N J 0 0=.J
0( / C#- g.IU$ 7% >#6# E2 ^
0 ) x- - 0( / ," 5 63!" 3 1( J 1#? 0
>2^
x- - 0( / >#! 8o "C38( J # 5 38) i.#
_ :P 0
# [
! 8o
#
>
K "
( [ / ( 0 <" - $ 0
1E+$ .=
<" - $ 8
# Y ' ,"
>D
!
# [ :" -, $ 0 ( 7#2%" Y ' X(" i. J >2^
0 5 #?.J :" -, $ p 5*(
: 3!"
"
= A! $ 0( / < O3-"
( C ( [
" x- - 7%
) ! H q- .$ 0Fb $ 38
)
Asadi
Kangarshahi & Akhlaghi Amiri, 2018
( [# _ .
: 3' > 02Q D [#$, ," 0 # 5 63!" "
}? >' q3-" .$ ] J 7Vo k !" ( q- 0Fb $ 7#2%" Y ' 5 < O3-" 0( /
7 " 3$ G a( . . 03D ) 79 #2^ >!" [E $ J
0( $ !
";) I3%" 5 , >+), JK 0#? "
X(" 0`? b$ [(" ," . 7 " D C#- J , 0Fb $ C~ o 0Fb $ A! $ 0( / 0#Q.J " "
.>!" ># "
"
( [ FUJ
# T N J
# / ( 0 1 (.!
.2$ 3#!
)*(
+(
+(", - -
/#
@ k .+-"
$
#
" )
"
( X 2%"
# '
) :" -, $ p 0Fb $ 0 $" >
( L 10 g !
! .$
" % 3D )
>!" 0 .
1
! .q $ 0 N J
# 1 (.! 0( / .2$ 3#!
(Swingle citrumelo)
M 6Q (
+ +(",
- - .+-"
/
#
@ k
$
#
" ) )
Citrus unshiu cv.
Miyagawa
( :" -, $ p
$,P ( + A? %
Y.2 • L H " EJ H D IJ 1$
" EJ >' 2( /
. M (") >
5 38
FUJ
# M F - B9 7~ % ( > $ 5 38(") 0 $"
M $ 0 ( ! 10
) g ! 1397 - 1388 . S V-" (
5 " 0(CVJ 0
: $, A $ 0(CVJ M .Q M .Q
>D ) . : ( /
? -P
# C 5 "
S -
"CD"
MSTAT-C
[# - #$ 08( F$ S V-"
k !"
:.$,P [E-"
M .Q
>D (;/
.
"(
5 38 FUJ
# M F - B9 7~ %
D" e= € ^
# ( 36 0=
27
%
# 0F
? g.L
D" e=
# ( 52 0=
53
%
# 0F
% i 6J "
7 / 14
fb! ," 3$
( : 3!" ! ". 1 5 " ")
(:" -, $
$.? Y ' >D 1 a P
11
%
pH
o 8 / 7 .>!" 03D ) " % :" -, $ > 0Fb $
! > $ 5 38("
D" e= € ^
# ( 36 0=
31
%
# 0F
? D" e= g.L
# ( 53 0=
3
%
# 0F i 6J "
118 fb! ," 3$
( 02Q D 30
# 3$.2 ,"
( :" -, $ ! ". 1 5 " ")
(:" -, $ : 3!"
Y ' >D 1 a P ! S.?
6 %
o pH
2 / 6 r . 0 $"
( 0 03D ) " % .>!"
5 "
$ : +- ! ".
5 38("
7~ % 1#'" % ! ".
z [# - #$
719
3 #2#$
$ m " o 3
/ 23 o $ 1%"
5 / 12
$ T2b$ m " o 6
/ 40 $ T2b$ 1%" o 6
- 0=
3- ! M $ 2 5 " ) 15
0? !
>!" 5 .
(:" -, $ : 3!" ! ". 1 5 " ") .
Y -.#/
- - .+-"
/
#
@ k
$
#
" )
g ! 1388 7 " D 1 (.!
.2$ 3#!
-.#/
5 $P 1o" $ . , !
$,P 38 (
@ 2( /
. M
: 38$, C#( / 1388
S V-"
g !
1389 g - [#$,
2Q"
02Q D 5
× 4 3$
) 500 03 ( 3E >' -
7 : $,
!
# 738 P
# 5 b%
"
/ ( M.2 B`J q- .$
# 0
" - . ,"
g - g.L : 3' :".=
02 = ," @( $,P 5 W2^ 5, B$
\ I$ ,
# P ( # # .
r ! 0
B( FJ .L
: 8E(
M.2( / S V-"
)
Asadi
Kangarshahi & Akhlaghi Amiri, 2014; 2018
(.
,"
g - > " 3 "
g ! 0! M $ 0 2Q" [#$,
) 1391 - 1389 S D k M #2 ^ ( i ," `
: ( / J 0- 38$, k 0-K ! M #2 ^ +(", , D S V-" M.2( / @( $,P )
Akhlaghi Amiri
& Asadi Kangarshahi, 2020
( . ,"
," ` g ! [#? "
$, : 3' >
# [ 2Q"
g ! 0! M $ 0
) 1392 - 1390 ( 1) 0 E+J
# 1 5
" : 3' UJ
( a ( + ," 1B% >'
BJ ( 1
$ 0 :
# 5.
0H 0 E#- E$ .L . - \;o
5 $ [ 0 >!" j 0 S,K 1392
jP C#-
5 $ 1395 . " „ :" BO( \ g !
) 1397 -
1390 ( ' Q.I'
# M ( + i 6J " 1$
>' g.L U$ ] J € ^
# X 0 J 10 3- ! 3$
/
#(
[ 10 3- ! 3$
K / 1U$
# -.
5," -"
)
#
. - E2 ^ 32
, D i ," @( $,P >'
) +(", 1393 ) @( $,P : ( / J ( 1397
: $, (
. >BN ( $ '" ") > "
g ! ,"
1393 g ! J
1395 g !
02o $ 0 .( S.! 0 :
S g.IU$ > " ," 1B% 5 $ $ ,"
>'
10
$
# 5.
] J = ' > 8% ,"
i 6J " ,"
2 - 1 3$
> "
' Q.I'
# M :P :, 02 = ,"
$
# 5.
$ ` " >!./
# 5.
>!./ >$ Ow l-
n' ," 5 63!" >!./ >D +H
(Stuchi et al., 2009)
$
# :"C
$ 5 I^
# :"C
g.2U$ $ = ".$
!"
# ( 03 J 1 %
#
!" 3
# :.
5 I^
a( 3#!) [#$ 3( ) #!" a# .E!" :"C#$ ( #!"
(…
5," -"
)
# 5.#$ >( .
)
Sphericity
(
-
# C ,"
0? `$
Q= (LWT1/3/L)
:P 0 0B! U$
L W
$ g.L T
# 5.
$ S J 5 2) 02Q D)
# 5.
$ € ^ (
# 5.
$ > = ,"
3) C L
( [ ^
# [ "
( [
! 0
$ )
Fattahi Moghaddam et al., 2017
.(
n' > "
g.2U$ $ = ".$ >B8- ," 5 63!"
!" 0
# ( 03 J 1 %
#
!" 3
# :.
^ 5 I
$ 5 I^ Q
# 5.
$ :, 0 5 I^ >B8- ," 5 63!"
# 5.
B8- :,
5.#$ :, 0 >!./ :, >B8- ," 5 63!" >!./
) 0B! U$
Tazima et al., 2013
.(
c- VJ
# [ / ( 0 /
# -.
0B! U$ T( L ,"
>B8-
# [ U$
# X /
# -.
U$ 0
# X / ( 0
`J
##
[ )
Bisio et
al., 2003
.(
0 J w ^ ubF$ fb!
)
Trunk cross
sectional area
( ," 5 63!" -.#/ 0( / 0? `$
TCSA= Perimeter2/4π
0 $P >! 0
:P 0 J w ^ ubF$ fb! TCSA
Perimeter
>!" 0 J X#U$
)
Dalal & Brar, 2012
(.
] J 7Vo
5 63!"
0? `$ ,"
V =2/3 πR2H
0 $P >!
0
:P WI- R
b%
] J
$ >' i 6J " H
.
>B8- ," 5 63!" >' E2 ^ : $ -"
) E2 ^
# S ).2 A`E$ 3$) ] J 7Vo 0 (>'
>'
` VJ E2 ^ ( i. V$ ," 5 63!"
J E2 ^
# g ! ,"
1393 g ! J 1397 0 >!
) $P
Stenzel & Neves, 2004
0B! U$ " .(
< J n' g ! ,"
1393 J 1397 ,"
) 0b "
1 ( 5 63!"
.
) 1 (
I =
1/(n-1) {|(a2-a1)|/ (a2+a1) + |(a3-a2)|/(a3+a2)+...+
|(a n –a n-1)|/ (a n+a n-1)}
:P 0 g ! " `J " n
$,P (
@
a
$
# :"C E2 ^ (
a g ! ,"
$
)
Monselise & Goldschmidt, 1982
.(
†J >o 8$
. 0b " k !" : 3' , #- .$
) 2 ( 0B! U$
.
) 2 (
E = (D × 0.75) × (D + 2.5)
:P 0 , #- .$ .†J >o 8$ E
" D
>!" (] J € ^ g.L [# - #$) ] J b%
[(" € D
0' 0 >!"
b' : 3' .
> ‡ 25
%
r . - b' [#
. > ‡ 5
/ 2 ? ' sD 3$
.†J " `J . 03 " ( ^" , M #2 ^ S V-" " ) >o 8$ 3E a( >o 8$ >B8- ," 7 : 3' g.IU$ .†J E2 ^ . 0B! U$ >' a( .†J
†J " `J k !"
. 3E >' E2 ^
0B! U$ : 3' )
Tazima et al., 2013
( .
23 4 !
!
g ! ," : 3' ] J 7Vo b% i 6J "
1390 J 1397
0Fb $ : 3' 5 ". C#- > " +("CD" - 0 $" 0Fb $ : 3' ," JK >
. "
[( 'P .
> : 3' ] J X!.3$ 7Vo @( $,P g ! 09 / 19 0 $"
62 / 11 g =) . A`E$ 3$
1 .(
0 2 .L 0 2= 0Fb $ "
>
Y ' T ^ ,"
# 3+
0Fb $ 0 >B8- 0 $"
"
T ^ >!" " .'
# 3+
3 z 38) AB! Y '
# 3+
"CD" : 3' (
@
$ -P ] J 7Vo .
)
Asadi Kangarshahi &
Akhlaghi Amiri, 2018; 2020
(.
M.2( / : 3'
##eJ - ( / g ! ] J 7Vo b% i 6J " >
`$
o J : 3' 5," -" u%" > " - "
1 F$ - $ > N ] J 7Vo
M.2( / : 3' J 0 $"
g ! 1397 0$" " .' +("CD" - 0 : _
. "
g.L Y -.#/ 0( / 0 J X#U$ X!.3$
8 g !
0 > 0 >B8- 0 $" M.2( / : 3' .L
`$
A#J J 0 ) . 3 "
27 21 3- ! 3$
0 >B8- 36
28 3- ! ( 3$
0 J X#U$ >B8- ?
M 6J (c- VJ) 0( / 0 J X#U$ 0 Y -.#/
`$
FJ > " - M.2( / "
. : 8E( B(
) 8 / 0 >? o g ! >+ L -.#/ 0( / c- VJ .(
0?. -, 0 > " "
.L g ! g " g ! 0
g ! " F$ [( 3 @( $,P 'P J S.!
$ : +- : E$ g ! 1 F3$ N" . . 3+# 7+
0( / 0 J X#U$ C#- ] J € ^ i 6J " \&3'" 0 Y -.#/
7 0 >B8- 0 $" > : 3'
g ! L x( J 0 5 . 3+# @( $,P g "
g ! g =) 3 @( $,P 1
F Q .(
.2$ 3#! 1 (.! 0( / " ) #$ .+-" - - : 3' R# . Q Q M.2( / : 3' "
," a(
M $ L : 3' 10
@( $,P g ! 1$".^ .=
:" BO( H i.% 02 = ," b#U$ ^ 8$ - [# ,"
. 3D - 1 (.! 0( / $ ! 0 >$ F$ : . K
0( / ( 0 >B8- .2$ 3#!
0!
0_) 0( / C#- "
02 = ," `3$ : FFU$ M F#FUJ x- -
Hardy,
- - <.' 1 UJ [# _ .>!" 5 z "C) 2004
.+-"
: 38$, 0 z "C) !
j J F#FUJ
) >!" 5
Anderson & Ferguson; 2015
x( 3- 0 (
1E . " >F b$ w o T#FUJ 1
: 3' 10 0? !
- - $
#
" ) / ( 0
!
# .2$ 3 / 1U$
# -.
-P "
.>!" 5 " : +- M.2( /
1 (.! 0( / " ) #$ .+-" - - 0? !10 : 3' .1 1E .([#( /) 0 $" (K ) > -P -.#/ 1U$ .2$ 3#!
Figure 1. 10 years tree of Miyagawa Satsuma mandarin on Swingle citrumelo rootstock and their graft union in alluvial plain (top) and piedmont plain (below).
g = 1 g ! > 0 $" .2$ 3#! 1 (.! 0( / " ) #$ .+-" - - : 3' +( M 6Q ' . 1397
- 1390 .
Table 1. Some vegetative characteristics of Miyagawa Satsuma mandarin trees on Swingle citrumelo rootstock in alluvial plain and piedmont plain at September 2011-2018.
Volume (m3) Crown width
(cm) Affinirty
Scion perimeter (cm) Rootstock
perimeter (cm) Plant height
(cm)
10.86 a 286.0 a
0.78 a 28.23 a
36.45 a 226.6 a
L1 (alluvial plain)
Location L2 (piedmont plain) 192.6 b 26.97 b 21.02 b 0.77 a 196.5 b 5.20 b
0.000 0.000
0.283 0.000
0.000 0.000
Prob. (5%)
1.74 f 148.6 e
0.72 c 7.42 h
10.03 h 124.1 g
2011 (Y1)
Year
4.65 e 206.3 d
0.76 bc 13.89 g
17.97 g 164.7 f
2012 (Y2)
4.83 e 210.1 d
0.80 ab 20.33 f
25.51 f 181.3 e
2013 (Y3)
5.87 e 220.6 d
0.83 a 24.42 e
29.57 e 197.7 d
2014 (Y4)
7.71 d 245.3 c
0.83 a 27.80 d
33.60 d 225.0 c
2015 (Y5)
10.15 c 270.0 b
0.81 a 30.60 c
37.94 c 253.8 b
2016 (Y6)
13.93 b 306.6 a
0.74 c 33.94 b
46.00 b 259.4 ab
2017 (Y7)
15.35 a 322.8 a
0.73 c 38.59 a
53.09 a 271.1 a
2018 (Y8)
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Prob. (5%)
2.86 f 188.8 d
0.76 c-f 11.63 h
15.31 h 151.9 jk
Y1L1
Year × location
0.62 f 108.4 f
0.68 g 3.219 j
4.75 j 96.4 l
Y1L2
7.77 de 270.6 bc
0.79 a-e 19.81 f
25.06 f 200.0 gh
Y2L1
1.54 f 141.9 e
0.73 e-g 7.97 i
10.88 i 129.4 k
Y2L2
7.36 de 260.0 bc
0.79 a-e 24.49 e
31.11 e 200.6 gh
Y3L1
2.30 f 160.2 e
0.81 a-d 16.16 g
19.91 g 161.9 ij
Y3L2
9.25 cd 286.9 b
0.83 ab 28.06 d
33.97 d 210.0 f-h
Y4L1
2.49 f 154.4 e
0.83 ab 20.79 f
25.16 f 185.3 hi
Y4L2
9.66 b-d 278.8 bc
0.86 a 31.53 c
36.92 d 230.6 ef
Y5L1
5.77 e 211.9 d
0.80 a-d 24.06 e
30.27 e 219.4 fg
Y5L2
11.41 bc 284.4 bc
0.82 a-c 33.83 c
41.24 c 256.9 b-d
Y6L1
8.88 d 255.6 bc
0.80 a-d 27.38 d
34.63 d 250.6 c-e
Y6L2
19.47 a 359.4 a
0.71 fg 36.56 b
51.34 b 283.1 a
Y7L1
8.39 d 253.8 c
0.77 b-f 31.31 c
40.66 c 235.6 d-f
Y7L2
19.09 a 359.4 a
0.71 fg 39.94 a
56.66 a 279.7 ab
Y8L1
11.62 b 286.3 b
0.75 d-f 37.25 b
49.53 b 262.5 a-c
Y8L2
0.000 0.000
0.006 0.001
0.002 0.002
Prob. (5%)
[# - #$ :.3!
`$ M 6J Y 3+$ \ o a( 1%" o g 3o" fb! "
5 . - " - Q
In each column, means with similar letters are not significantly difference at 5% probability level.
! n' g.L M.2( / : 3' E2 ^
5
) g ! 1393 J 1397 [#? " T b$ 0 ( 5
g !
5," -" . : 3' +(", 02o $ 0B! U$ #)
g =) 2 : .(
5 $ [ 5 " &B% 0 .L
1392 5 $ jP 1395 3D" p 6J" :" BO( $ !
g ! 0 1393
1) 7 " `J AB!
zC(
5.#$
0H 0 5 1#E+J 0 $" M.2( / 5*(
0 .L g ! E2 ^ X!.3$ 0 93
M.2( /
a( ," 3+# >' " 0 $"
S ).2#
: 3' X!.3$ E2 ^ g ! : ? . >BN o > M.2( / 45
@ J [# . . S ).2#
0' H " 0 $" M.2( / : 3' 0 A=.$ 0#? "
< J 5 $ jP ) , $ ! . -. (
1395
$ q- 0 E2 ^ 3 #N J ( 0 #!
:.H 03 " : 3' 5.#$
- . 5 > "
1) 7 , ? . 5 +- , 9P ,. C#- C# -"
g ! 0 $" M.2( / : 3' 1396
E2 ^ @ < J 0' H 5 &^ K 3o" 0 - " : +-
n' X!.3$ .>!" 5 . ‡. $ 7 ) , $ ! 0
< J n' a( .+-" - - : 3' 0
#8 g.L >!" 7 $ 5
," JK #8 0 $" g !
) . >
67 / 0 0 >B8- 23
/ 0 ^ 0 0=.J (
< J 0- 3!P 0
50 / 0 >!"
)
Monselise &
Goldschmidt, 1982
(
$ 0 >6) :".J
5 . 7q $ - 0 $" : 3' 7q $ > : 3' n' [(" M" ##eJ 5 U$ .>!"
g !
[# > : 3' W23O$
22 / 0 J 25 / 0
[# 0 $" : 3' 58
/ 0 J 87 / 0 g =) . 2
: $ -" .(
aH. 7Vo 1#? 0 ] J 7Vo o" E2 ^ J
A#J J 0 ) . > ," 3+# 0 $" M.2( / : 3' 28
/ 6
62 / 4 E2 ^ .(] J 7Vo A`E$ 3$ S ).2#
g.L : 3' ` VJ 4
) - ( / g ! 1397
- 1394 (
$ ! @ J >2^ 0 0 ? ! [3D ) q- : 5.#$ 1) zC( :" BO(
3D" p 6J" 0 $" 0H g !)
1393 : 3' ( o > M.2( /
223 0 $"
o 232 .>!" 5 . S ).2#
g = 2 . : E$ g ! 1 F3$ N" g ! N" [# - #$ 08( F$
" ) #$ .+-" - - : 3' +(", +( M 6Q ' 0( /
.2$ 3#! 1 (.!
.
Table 2. Mean comparison effect of year and interaction effect of year and location on some vegetative and generative characteristics of Miyagawa Satsuma mandarin trees on Swingle citrumelo.
[# - #$ :.3!
`$ M 6J Y 3+$ \ o a( 1%" o g 3o" fb! "
5 . - " - Q
In each column, means with similar letters are not significantly difference at 5% probability level.
0( / M B $ W23O$ S % " <.' E2 ^ 0 >B8- K ` VJ E2 ^ C#- .2$ 3#! 1 (.!
0( / ( 5 z "C) `3$ : FFU$ x( 3-
>!"
)
Tazima et al., 2013; Zekri, 2008; Noda et al., 2001
( w o T#FUJ ," 1Q o x( 3- 0
3E : 3' E2 ^ 0B! U$ " . " >F b$
g.IU$ 7 g ! a() - ( / g ! E2 ^ X!.3$
: 3' " `J 0Fb $ (g.IU$ / g ! a(
) 3E 500 ) 5 03 1Q".D (>' 4
× 3
o > 0 < w ( 3$
3 / 31 0 $"
8 / 30 .$ .†J >o 8$ 0B! U$ . . 3E [J g ! : 3' +( .3 D 0 0=.J , #-
g !) - ( / 1397
> : 3' " ( 47
/ 16
0 $" : 3' "
60 / 11 $P >! 0 u $ 3$
g =) 2 , #- .$ >o 8$ u%" .(
: 3' "
10 > .2$ 3#! 0( / " ) #$ .+-" - - 0? !
o 42 q- [(" ˆ . 0 $" ," 3+# Q
3E : 3' .†J " `J >o 8$ [(" [3D ) >
615 0 $"
896 0=.J ? >!" 02Q"
+- " ( / > - $ 0 $" M.2( / 0E (" 0 5
" 0 $" : 3' " `J > " +("CD" - . .>D ) q- 5 0B! U$ " `J ," 3 (
0! 5 $ $ C#- 5 $ .( 5.#$ 0(CVJ x( 3- g =) 0 $" > 0Fb $ ?".3$ g ! 3
4 ( 5.#$ 0 " : +-
>
3+# 5 I^ :,
0 )
#J J A 6 / 7 S ) 8 / 5
\ Q >!./ (%
J n'
) JK > "
64 / 1 5.#$ ( o"
>!./ 0 $"
7#Ow J ) 35 / 0 2#$
( 3$
$ = ".$ >!./ :,
#!" a# .E!" :.#!" 3#J 1 % 03( #!" g.2U$
0 ) 3+# (… [#$ 3( ) A#J J
7 / 8 % 25 % 62 %
6 / 28 3 " (%
. 0`? b$
`3$
5 " : +- -"
0
\&3'"
$ A , AB!
$ l- : 3
# 5.
$ % u VJ . .
[# _ eJ
##
M"
: !.- 0 l-
$ 38 Y '
"
)
Lado et al., 2018;
Mesejo et al., 2012
(.
0 $"
A $
# 0+
> ," 3
$
"(
[
$ M - !.-
A ,
# 3+
$ Y ' 0 $"
3
>!"
.
"(
[ FUJ
# M F 3- ( x w o @ */ 5 $P >! 0
:P 0 " >F b$
$
# 5.
0 $"
0
g ! 5," -"
5.#$ M #Q.I' #)
TSS TA
AA
# 3+
. 3 "
5.#$ € ^ 0 g.L ` " >B8-
5.#$ 5 $ .(
> M.2( / 0
`$ .L
Teorical yield (ton/hectar)
Teorical number
Teorical space (m2/tree) Alternate bearing Index (%)
Cumulative yield (kg/tree) Yield efficiency (kg/m3)
Scion TCSA (cm2) Rootstock TCSA (cm2)
Volume (m3) Yield (kg/tree)
43.70 795 b 13.46 a
0.233 b 148.62 a 4.62 b
95.15 a 161.54 a
13.78 a 53.71 a
L1 (alluvial plain)
Locatio n 49.22 1421 a 8.71 b0.668 a 104.58 b 6.28 a67.09 b 111.29 b 7.43 b 46.84 a L2 (piedmont plain) 0.162 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.020 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.075
Prob. (5%)
20.64 d 1692 a
8.26 d ---
23.18 e 2.76 b
49.17 d 71.89 e
5.87 d 23.18 d 2014(Y1)
Year 47.09 b1234 b9.37 c0.552 a60.92 d7.21 a63.62 c 91.60 d 7.71 c 37.74 c 2015 (Y2)
63.85 a 993 c
10.66 b 0.445 b
126.6 c 7.33 a
76.56 c 116.9 c
10.15 b 66.19 b
2016 (Y3)
33.12 c 866 cd
13.11 a 0.409 b
171.4 b 3.44 b
94.37 b 172.6 b
13.93 a 44.81 c
2017 (Y4)
67.59 a 755 d
14.03 a 0.398 b
250.9 a 6.52 a
121.9 a 229.0 a
15.35 a 79.45 a
2018 (Y5)
0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.000
Prob. (5%)
38.79 d-f 892 cd
11.64 b ---
45.36 ef 4.94 cd
63.28 ef 92.41 de
9.25 bc 45.36 cd Y1L1
Year × location
2.49 g 2493 a 4.87 f
--- 1.02 g 0.59 e
35.07 g 51.37 f
2.49 e 1.02 e
Y1L2
33.78 f 937 cd
11.17 b-d 0.231 c
82.71 de 4.00 d
80.47 de 109.2 d
9.66 bc 37.35 d
Y2L1
60.40 bc 1530 b
7.57 e 0.873 a
39.13 fg 10.43 a
46.77 fg 74.02 ef
5.77 d 38.13 d Y2L2
53.05 c-e 914 cd
11.51 bc 0.251 c
143.3 c 6.02 b-d 92.58 cd
136.1 c 11.41 b
60.56 bc Y3L1
74.66 ab 1071 c
9.79 cd 0.638 b
109.9 cd 8.65 ab
60.55 f 97.68 de 8.88 bc
71.81 b Y3L2
36.99 ef 619 d
16.50 a 0.233 c
203.2 b 3.24 de
109.0 bc 211.1 b
19.47 a 59.94 bc Y4L1
29.25 f 1114 c
9.72 d 0.585 b
139.6 c 3.63 de
79.74 de 134.1 c
8.38 c 29.69 d Y4L2
55.90 cd 615 d
16.47 a 0.217 c
268.6 a 4.91 cd
130.4 a 258.9 a
19.09 a 65.34 b
Y5L1
79.29 a 896 cd
11.60 b 0.578 b
233.2 ab 8.13 a-c
113.3 b 199.2 b
11.62 b 93.56 a
Y5L2
0.000 0.000 0.000
0.010 ---
0.000 ----
0.065 0.000
0.000 Prob. (5%)
. . 0 $" ," JK "
," 5.#$ ` " [3D ) q-
5.#$ > = 0!
> M.2( / 5 $ $
J
5.#$
Z/ 0 $"
- . J >B8-) > " n' .
7 5 $ .( 7 ( #!" 0 g.2U$ $ = ".$
5 I^ :"C#$ >B8-) 5.#$ 5 I^ Q 5 $ $ 0
5 $ .( (5.#$ :, 5 $ $ 5 I^ pH
5.#$
0 > M.2( /
`$ .L ," JK "
. . 0 $"
$ € ^ 0 g.L >B8-
# 5.
g.L
g ! : E$ W23O$
@( $,P 0
+$ .L
eJ
##
eJ -
##
M"
"CD" :P ( + . (
`
$
# 5.
/ ( M.2 Z/ " 3 "
J 0 J (
x
g ! > ;) - J )
g =) 3
4 .(
g = 3 . : E$ g ! 1 F3$ N" g ! N" [# - #$ 08( F$
0( / " ) #$ .+-" - - 5.#$ 6# M 6Q '
.2$ 3#! 1 (.!
.
Table 3. Mean comparison effect of year and interaction effect of year and location on some quality and quantity characteristics of Miyagawa Satsuma mandarin on Swingle citrumelo rootstock.
Vit. C (mg/100g)
TSS/ TA
TA (%)
TSS (%)
Peel texture**
Peel color**
D2/D1*
Peel diameter (mm) Peel weight/ fruit weight (%)
Juice (%)
Fruit weight(g)
September 10
38.28 b 5.315 a 1.485 b 7.88 b 2.21
10.63 b 0.95 a 2.59 b 46.11 b 43.91 a
125.9 a L1(alluvial plain)
Locatio n 51.92 a4.501b2.320 a10.16 a2.5211.06 a0.90 b3.48 a 50.05 a 40.07 b120.2 a L2 (piedmont plain) 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.083 0.013 0.000 0.000 0.020 0.011
--- Prob. (5%)
47.74 a 4.70 b 1.98 a 8.94 ab 2.22 b 10.50 b 0.89 b 3.29 a 49.35 a 42.73 b
140.9 a 2014 (Y1)
Year 45.98 a4.66 b1.90a8.49 b2.81 a11.25 a0.87 b3.20 a 50.57 a 37.37 c124.4 b 2015 (Y2)
41.58 b 5.36 a
1.83a 9.63 a 2.06 b 10.78 b 1.02 a 2.62 b 44.31 b 45.87 a
103.8 c 2016 (Y3)
0.002 0.017 ----
0.017 0.005 0.001 0.000 0.002 0.013 0.000
0.000 Prob. (5%)
46.20 b 5.53 a 1.56 c 8.63 b 1.88 b 9.81 d 0.92 b 2.33 c 44.64 bc 47.25 a
120.7 bc Y1L1
Year × location
49.28 b 3.87 b 2.40 ab 9.25 b 2.56 a 11.19 ab 0.87 c
4.25 a 54.06 a 38.21 b 161.0 a
Y1L2
34.76 c 5.03 a 1.28 c 6.38 c 2.88 a 11.63 a 0.93 b 2.84 c 49.92 ab 37.43 b
140.4 b Y2L1
57.20 a 4.30 b 2.52 a 10.60 a 2.75 a 10.88 bc 0.82 d
3.56 b 51.22 a 37.31 b 108.5 cd Y2L2
33.88 c 5.39 a 1.62 c 8.63 b 1.88 b 10.44 c 1.02 a 2.61 c 43.76 c 47.04 a 116.6 c Y3L1
49.28 b 5.34 a 2.04 b 10.63 a 2.25 ab 11.13 ab 1.02 a
2.64 c 44.87 bc 44.70 a
91.0 d Y3L2
0.006 0.003 0.019 0.001 0.176 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.0611 0.036
0.000 Prob. (5%)
5.#$ w ^ b% /5.#$ ?.L b% :*
*: Fruit longitudinal diameter / Fruit transverse diameter
n' :**
+H (Stuchi et al., 2009)
**: Coding with optical indexes (Stuchi et al., 2009)
[# - #$ :.3!
`$ M 6J Y 3+$ \ o a( 1%" o g 3o" fb! "
5 . - " - Q
In each column, means with similar letters are not significantly difference at 5% probability level.
g = 4 . : E$ g ! 1 F3$ N" g ! N" [# - #$ 08( F$
" ) #$ .+-" - - 5.#$ 6# M 6Q ' 1 (.! 0( /
.2$ 3#!
.
Table 4. Mean comparison effect of year and interaction effect of year and location on some quality and quantity characteristics of Miyagawa Satsuma mandarin on Swingle citrumelo rootstock.
pH
Vit. C (mg/100 g)
TSS/TA
TA (%)
TSS (%)
Peel texture**
Peel color**
Sphericity
D2/D1*
Peel diameter (mm)
Peel weight/ fruit weight (%) Juice (%) Fruit weight (g)
October 1
3.45 a 53.83 b 9.28 a 0.95 b 8.21 b 1.85 b 10.08 b 0.95a 0.96 2.53b 45.31 b 45.01a 142.5a L1(alluvial plain)
Location
2.95 b 69.23 a 7.64 b 1.54 a 10.29 a 2.25 a 10.56 a 0.90b 0.97 2.88a 49.26 a 42.53a 134.9a L2(piedmont plain)
0.000 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.001 0.041 0.017 0.000 ---- 0.010 0.029 0.119 0.225 Prob. (5%)
3.36 a 53.68 b 6.58 b 1.49 a 9.38 ab 1.94 b 10.38 a --- 0.88b 2.92 a 48.9 a 43.21 b 149.4a 2014 (Y1)
Year 3.23 b51.26 b6.34 b1.43 a8.63 b2.38 a10.56 a0.94a 1.01a 2.69 ab 47.0 a 40.97 b154.4a 2015 (Y2)
3.02 c 79.64 a 12.45a 0.80 b 9.75 a 1.84 b 10.03 a 0.91b 1.00 a 2.50 b 45.9 a 47.12 a 112.4b 2016 (Y3)
0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.040 0.013 0.249 0.001 0.002 0.100 0.297 0.011 0.000 Prob. (5%)
3.68 a 50.16 d 7.61 b 1.23 b 9.25 bc 1.88 ab 9.81 bc ---
0.88 b 2.67 ab 46.17ab 45.72ab 118.4b Y1L1
Year × location
3.04 c 57.20 c 5.55 c 1.74 a 9.50 a-c 2.00 ab 10.94 a ---
0.88 b 3.16 a 51.59 a 40.70 b 180.4a Y1L2
3.55 b 40.92 e 7.31 b 0.95 c 6.88 d 2.38 a 10.81 a 0.96 a 1.01 a 2.67 ab 45.36ab 40.83 b 177.6a Y2L1
2.91 d 61.60 c 5.38 c 1.92 a 10.38ab 2.38 a 10.3a-c 0.92 b 1.02 a 2.71 ab 48.71ab 41.11 b 131.2b Y2L2
3.12 c 70.40 b 12.91a 0.66 d 8.50 c 1.31 b 9.63 c 0.94 ab 0.99 a 2.24 b 44.40 b 48.47 a 131.7b Y3L1
2.92 d 88.88 a 11.99a 0.95 c 11.00 a 2.38 a 10.44ab 0.88 c 1.0 a 2.75 a 47.47ab 45.76ab 93.2 c Y3L2
0.000 0.011 ---- 0.004 0.028 0.052 0.003 0.231 ---- 0.259 --- 0.365 0.000 Prob. (5%)
5.#$ w ^ b% /5.#$ ?.L b% :*
*: Fruit longitudinal diameter / Fruit transverse diameter
n' :**
+H (Stuchi et al., 2009)
**: Coding with optical indexes (Stuchi et al., 2009)
[# - #$ :.3!
`$ M 6J Y 3+$ \ o a( 1%" o g 3o" fb! "
5 . - " - Q
In each column, means with similar letters are not significantly difference at 5% probability level.
