The effect of grapevine training systems on grape yield quality and Quantity of Vitis vinifera cv. Red Sultana (A five years record)

Document Type : original paper

Authors

1 Horticulture Crops Research Department, Qazvin Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Qazvin, Iran.

2 Horticulture Crops Research Department, West Azerbaijan Agricultural and Natural Resources Research and Education Center, AREEO, Urmia, Iran.

Abstract

Background and objectives: There are various grapevine-training methods in the world because of the high formability of grapevine. These methods are vary depending on the variety, type of use, climatic conditions of the area, mechanization, and economic issues in each region. Some studies have shown that the type of training system affects the quantitative and qualitative yield of grape varieties. The aim of present study was to determine the effect of training systems on the quantitative and qualitative yield of grapevine cv. Red Sultana.
Materials and methods: Eight grapevine training systems including High Cordon, Medium Cordon, Low Cordon, Geneva, Guyot, Traditional, Head, and Wye (Y) were considered. The research was carried out in a randomized complete block design with three replications and six plants per plot for five years at Takestan grape research station. Quantitative and qualitative traits of the fruit, such as yield, raisin yield, cluster around, cluster diameter, cluster length, berry length and berry width, pH of the fruit extract, total soluble solids (TSS) and titrable acidity of fruit extract (TA) were recorded. Graphical analysis technic was used to determine the best training system.
Results: Yield, berry diameters, TA, TSS, raisin yield, and ripening were significantly more affected by the type of training system than other traits (p < 0.05). The highest fruit yield (19.8 kg/plant) and raisin yield (6.9 kg/plant) were obtained in high Cordon training method. The highest average length and width of the berry was in the high Cordon system. The highest (24.6 degrees of Brix) and lowest (21.9 degrees of Brix) of TSS were recorded in low Cordon and traditional systems, respectively. The total acidity of the fruit juice was the highest in the high Cordon system and lowest in the traditional systems. The highest rate of sugar/acid was in the traditional system. Y and low Cordon systems were the earliest and traditional system was the longest of the fruit ripening point of view. High Cordon training system was the closest system to the optimum point of all studied traits.
Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the type of grapevine training system affected the fruit and raisin yield, the berry diameter, the TSS and TA of the fruit juice and the ripening. Therefore, by choosing the appropriate grapevine training system, it can manage the yield and quality of the fruit, which high Cordon system was the best system for grapevine cv. Red Sultana training in the Takestan region.

Keywords


1.Alexe, C. 1995. Cultural practices for growing the new real winegrape cultivar Coduna at the Odobesti vineyard. Cercetari - Agro. Res. Moldavia. 27: 201-208.
2.Asbahi, S.S., Ebadi, A., Zamani, Z., Vezvaei, A., Nagavi, M. and Talaei, A. 2004. Effect of three types of education system on yield and quality of five grapevine cultivars. Iran. J. Hort. Sci. Tech. 5: 198-200. (In Persian)
3.Bruce, P.B., Patricia, A.S. and Paul, H.H. 2008. Impact of training system on vine performance and fruit composition of Traminette. J. Enol. Vitic. 59: 39-46.
 4.Cavallo, P., Poni, S. and Rotundo, A.2001. Ecophysiology and vine performance of cv. “Aglianico”' under various training systems. Sci. Hort. 87: 21-32.
5.Colova, V., Patricia, B., Parker, L., Walters, T. and Leong, S. 2007. Evaluation of yield, fruit quality and photosynthesis of two training/trellis system and canopy management practices for carlos and noble Muscadine grapes in florida. J. Int. Sci. Vign. Vin. 41: 43-49.
6.Falcão, L.D., Chaves, E.S., Burin, V.M., Falcão, A.P., Gris, E.F., Bonin, V. and Bordignon, M.T. 2008. Ripening of Cabernet Sauvignon berries from grapevines grown with two different training systems and environmental conditions in a new grape growingregion in Brazil. En línea. English ed.35: 271-282.
7.Ferree, D., Steiner, T., Gallander, J., Scurlock, D., Johns, G. and Riesen, R. 2002. Performance of ‘Seyval Blanc’ grape in four training systems over five years. Hort. Sci. 37: 1023-1027.
8.Harrell, C. and Williams, L. 1987. Net CO2 assimilation rate of grapevine leaves in response to various training systems. Plant Physiol. 83: 457-459.
9.Harrell, D. and Williams, L. 1985. Effects of various training system on leaf net CO2 assimilation rate of two seedless grape varieties. Plant Physiol. Sup. 77: 610-612.
10.Howell, G.S. 2006. Influence of Training System Choice and Shoot Density on Yield, Yield Components and Fruit Composition of Cabernet Franc Grapevines. (Final report). Michigan State University. 24p.
11.Jehad Agriculture Ministry. 2016. Agricultural Statistics of Iran. Ministry of Jehad Agriculture Studies Office of Statistics and Information Publications. (In Persian)
12.Kamiloğlu, Ö. 2011. The effects of rootstocks and training systems on the growth and fruit quality of the ‘Round Seedless’ grape. J. Food Agric. Environ. 10: 350-354.
13.Mahmoodzadeh, H., Rasoli, V. and Qurbanian, D. 2008. Effect of Some Training Systems onVegetative Growth, Fruit Yield and Fruit Quality of Vitis vinifera cv.Sefid Bidaneh in Takestan Region. Karaj, J. Seed P. Improv.2: 373-387. (In Persian)
14.Palliotti, A. 2012. A new closing Y-shaped training system for grapevines. Aust. J. Grape Wine R. 18: 57-63.
15.Rasoli, V. 2013. Study of compatibility of different methods of training systems of Bidaneh Sefid cultivar in Takestan region (2th phase ). (Final report No. 44458). Qazvin Agricultural and Natural Resourses Research and Education Center, AREEO, Iran. 23p. (In Persian)
16.Rasoli, V. 2017. The effect of some grapevine training systems on yield and privalency some pests and diseases in Vitis vinifera Var. Sefid Bidaneh.Agri. Natur. Resou. Resear. J. 20: 1-8. (In Persian)
17.Roper, A. and Williams, L. 1998. Effects of training system on fruit set of Sultanina grape cultivar. J. Enol. Vitic. 54: 114-118.
18.Safran, B. and Bernstein, Z. 1973. Recent development in preparing seedless tables grapes for exoprt. Dec. Fruit Gro. 23: 108-110.
19.Singh, I. and Chauhan, K. 1980. Quality improvement in grapes. Ind. J. Hort.24: 2-8.
20.Taylor, B.K. and Leamon, K.C. 1991. Trellis effects on yield and fruit quality of five table grape varieties in the Murray valley. Aust. J. Exp. Agr.31: 85-89.
21.Wolfe, D. and Brown, G. 1995. Influence over a ten-year period of training system on yield and fruitfulness of table grape cultivars. Fruit Var. J.49: 79-81.
22.Zhang, D., Hongying, J., Xingli, C. and Xue, F.X. 1995. Studies on the essential relationship between canopy and microclimate vine growth, grape yield and berry quality. Acta Hort. Sinica.22: 110-116.