Orchard Floor Management Influence on Summer Annual Weeds and Young Peach Tree Performance

This study compared the effect of weed control and orchard floor management (OFMA) options including organic mulch on summer annual weed interference in a newly established peach orchard. Weed interference where no preemergence (PRE) herbicides were applied, including vole damage, caused 29% peach tree mortality, reduced tree trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA) 62% by the fourth year of orchard establishment, and reduced fruit yield and fruit number in 1999 by 73 and 75%, respectively, but had no effect on fruit size. Compared with a no-till or conventionally tilled orchard floor, the population of grassy weeds within the tree row was greater in killed perennial ryegrass sod (PRS) plus hard fescue residue mulch treatments but was less in killed PRS plus tall fescue residue mulch treatments. Among the no-PRE treatments, the tree row broadleaf weed populations were suppressed in killed PRS with or without the addition of fescue residue mulch to the tree row when compared with the no-till or conventionally tilled orchard floor treatments. PRE herbicide treatments strongly affected peach fruit yield and TCSA but not average fruit size. There was no effect among the killed PRS, with or without hard or tall fescue residue mulch treatments, on peach fruit yield, TCSA, or average fruit size when compared with the no-till or conventionally tilled orchard floor treatment options. All treatments with herbicide had higher yields in 1999 than those without herbicides.

Download Full-text

Vegetation-free Width and Irrigation Impact Peach Tree Growth, Fruit Yield, Fruit Size, and Incidence of Hemipteran Insect Damage

HortScience ◽

10.21273/hortsci.50.5.699 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 50 (5) ◽

pp. 699-704 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Connie L. Fisk ◽

Michael L. Parker ◽

Wayne Mitchem

Keyword(s):

Tree Growth ◽

Total Yield ◽

Fruit Size ◽

Fruit Weight ◽

Fruit Yield ◽

Strip Width ◽

Insect Damage ◽

Peach Tree ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Fruit Samples

Orchard floor vegetation competes with peach trees for water and nutrients and may harbor pathogens and insects. Tree growth, fruit yield, and fruit size can be optimized through management of vegetation in the tree row and irrigation. Under-tree vegetation-free strip widths (0, 0.6, 1.2, 2.4, 3.0, and 3.6 m) and irrigation were studied in years four through eight of a young peach orchard to determine their effects on peach tree growth and fruit yield, harvest maturity, and fruit size. Immature fruit samples were collected during thinning in years four through six to determine the effect of the treatments on the incidence of hemipteran (catfacing) insect damage. Trunk cross-sectional area (TCSA), as a measure of tree growth, increased with increasing vegetation-free strip width; trees grown in the 3.6-m vegetation-free strip had TCSAs 2.2 times greater, on average, than trees grown in the 0-m vegetation-free strip. TCSA also increased with irrigation; trees grown with irrigation had TCSAs 1.2 times greater, on average, than trees grown without irrigation. Yield increased with increasing vegetation-free strip width, from 9.6 kg per tree in the 0-m plot to 26.5 kg per tree in the 3.6-m plot in year four, to 24.3 kg per tree in the 0-m plot and 39.6 kg per tree in the 3.6-m plot in year eight, for a total yield over years 4–8 per tree of 100 kg in the 0-m plot compared with 210 kg per tree in the 3.6-m plot. Yield, average fruit weight, and average fruit diameter increased with irrigation in three of 5 years; the other 2 years had higher than average rainfall reducing the need for supplemental irrigation. In 3 out of 5 years fruit in irrigated plots matured earlier than fruit in nonirrigated plots. In all years, fruit grown in the 0-m strip matured earliest and had the smallest diameter. Establishing a vegetation-free strip of as narrow as 0.6 m reduced the incidence of catfacing damage compared with the 0-m treatment, even though the orchard was on a commercial pesticide spray schedule. The least damage was seen with the industry standard vegetation-free strip widths greater than 3.0 m with or without irrigation.

Download Full-text

Tree Growth, Fruit Size, and Yield Response of Mature Peach to Weed-Free Intervals

Weed Technology ◽

10.1614/wt-06-002.1 ◽

2007 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

pp. 102-105 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Andrew W. MacRae ◽

Wayne E. Mitchem ◽

David W. Monks ◽

Michael L. Parker ◽

Roger K. Galloway

Keyword(s):

North Carolina ◽

Total Yield ◽

Fruit Size ◽

Fruit Weight ◽

Yield Response ◽

Peach Tree ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Common Lambsquarters ◽

Smooth Pigweed ◽

Large Crabgrass

An experiment was conducted at one location in 1999 and two locations in 2000 to determine the critical weed-free period for peach in North Carolina. The cultivars for the three locations were ‘Contender’, ‘Norman’, and ‘Summerprince’. Weed-free intervals of 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 wk after peach tree bloom were established. Paraquat at 1.1 kg ai/ha plus nonionic surfactant at 0.25% v/v was applied every 10 d, after treatments were initiated at peach bloom, to maintain weed-free plots. Large crabgrass, hairy vetch, and smooth crabgrass were the primary weeds in Contender. Horseweed, smooth crabgrass, and large crabgrass were the primary weeds in Norman. Bermudagrass, smooth pigweed, and common lambsquarters were the primary weeds in Summerprince. No differences in trunk cross-sectional area were observed between the weed-free periods. Maintaining the orchard floor weed-free for 12 wk after peach tree bloom resulted in the greatest fruit size (individual fruit weight and diameter), total yield, and fruit number.

Download Full-text

Weed Suppression by Grasses for Orchard Floor Management

Weed Technology ◽

10.1614/wt-d-11-00044.1 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 26 (3) ◽

pp. 559-565 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Thomas J. Tworkoski ◽

D. Michael Glenn

Keyword(s):

Perennial Ryegrass ◽

Tall Fescue ◽

Fruit Size ◽

Fruit Trees ◽

The United States ◽

Weed Suppression ◽

Atlantic Region ◽

Red Fescue ◽

Orchard Floor Management ◽

Peach Trees

Fruit trees in orchards of the mid-Atlantic region of the United States are often planted in vegetation-free rows alternating with grass alleys. Grass managed to suppress weeds but to compete minimally with fruit trees may be an alternative to herbicide and tillage. This research was conducted in the greenhouse and field to assess five different grasses that may suppress weeds without reducing yield of fruit trees. In the greenhouse with high seeding rates, red fescue competed more effectively than did chewings fescue, tall fescue, and perennial ryegrass with three weeds (damesrocket, cornflower, and chicory). However, with reduced seeding rates, similar to rates used in the field, grass competitiveness with weeds was similar between red fescue, tall fescue, and perennial ryegrass. Similar results were obtained during a 4-yr field experiment; roughstalk bluegrass competed least effectively with weeds but the other four grasses provided similar weed suppression—generally providing as much weed suppression as traditional herbicides. None of the candidate grasses significantly reduced yields of 10-yr-old apple and peach trees, although fruit size was affected by some grasses. The grass that was least suppressive of yield, roughstalk bluegrass, was the least effective in controlling weeds. Annual mowing in combination with four of the grasses tested is one option to manage the orchard floor with reduced herbicides, but fruit size may decrease.

Download Full-text

Orchard Floor Preparation Did Not Affect Early Peach Tree Performance on Aura Sandy Loam Soil

HortTechnology ◽

10.21273/horttech.13.2.0321 ◽

2003 ◽

Vol 13 (2) ◽

pp. 321-324 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Robert D. Belding ◽

Bradley A. Majek ◽

Gail R.W. Lokaj ◽

Jeffrey Hammerstedt ◽

Albert O. Ayeni

Keyword(s):

Prunus Persica ◽

Agricultural Research ◽

Sandy Loam ◽

Fruit Size ◽

Organic Matter Content ◽

Exchange Capacity ◽

Matter Content ◽

Peach Tree ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Peach Trees

Peach (Prunus persica) trees were established and grown from 1996 to 1999 at the Rutgers Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Bridgeton, N.J., to compare performance under four methods of orchard floor preparation: flat no-till, flat cultivated, mound unmulched, and mound mulched orchard floors. The experimental site was flat and the soil was a well-drained Aura gravelly sandy loam (61% sand, 31% silt, 8% clay) with a pH of 6.5, cation exchange capacity 5.7, and organic matter content of 2.0%. Soil moisture holding and gas exchange capacity determine the efficacy of mounding in peach orchards. Under these conditions, the method of orchard floor preparation had no effect on peach tree trunk cross sectional area (TCSA), fruit number per tree, fruit size, and yield. Thus, without irrigation, there was no advantage to the early performance of peach trees associated with orchard floor mounding on Aura gravelly sandy loam when situated on a flat terrain.

Download Full-text

Peach Rootstock Performance of BY-520-9 and Lovell in a Peach Tree Short Life Replant Site

HortScience ◽

10.21273/hortsci.32.3.497c ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 32 (3) ◽

pp. 497C-497 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Michael L. Parker ◽

Dave Ritchie ◽

Andy Nyczepir

Keyword(s):

North Carolina ◽

Tree Mortality ◽

Peach Tree ◽

Sectional Area ◽

Short Life ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Tree Survival ◽

Tree Removal ◽

History Of ◽

Old Trees

A study was initiated in 1994 to evaluate the performance of the recently released peach rootstock Guardian TM (BY-5209-9), compared to Lovell, the commercial standard in North Carolina. `Redhaven' was the scion for both rootstocks. Guardian&™ is reported to be tolerant to root-knot nematodes and not affected by ring nematodes, which contribute to the incidence of peach tree short life (PTSL). The site of this study has a history of poor peach tree survival. Six-year-old trees were removed because of tree mortality from PTSL in Spring 1993. After tree removal, one-half of each existing row was pre-plant fumigated and trees were replanted over the rows of the previous orchard in Feb. 1994. In Spring 1996, tree mortality for the trees planted on Lovell was 30%, compared to 10% for the trees planted on GuardianTM. Trunk cross-sectional area for trees grown in the fumigated soil was approximately double that of trees grown in the unfumigated soil for both GuardianTM and Lovell. The 1996 fruit crop was eliminated from frost/freeze conditions and 1997 yields will be discussed. In Fall 1996, one-half of the trees were treated with a post-plant nematicide to determine if such treatments are necessary or beneficial with the GuardianTM rootstock.

Download Full-text

Prunus Rootstock Affect Long-term Orchard Performance of `Redhaven' Peach on Brookston Clay Loam

HortScience ◽

10.21273/hortsci.29.3.167 ◽

1994 ◽

Vol 29 (3) ◽

pp. 167-171 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Richard E.C. Layne

Keyword(s):

Cold Hardiness ◽

Tree Mortality ◽

Prunus Persica ◽

Fruit Size ◽

Fruit Weight ◽

Cumulative Number ◽

Clay Loam ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Yield Efficiency ◽

Tree Survival

Performance of `Redhaven' peach [Prunus persica (L.) Batsch.] propagated on nine experimental Prunus rootstock was evaluated over 8 years beginning in 1984, in a randomized complete-block experiment with 10 replications on a Brookston clay loam soil type near Harrow, Ont. This experiment was part of an interregional NC-140 peach rootstock experiment. Significant rootstock-induced effects were noted for increase in trunk cross-sectional area, cumulative tree height and spread, cumulative number of root suckers, yield, average fruit weight, yield efficiency, winter injury, cold hardiness, and tree survival. None of the clonally propagated rootstock gave satisfactory overall performance. All trees on GF655-2, 80% on GF677, 60% Self-rooted, and 50% on GF1869 were dead by the eighth year. In addition, suckering was a major problem on GF1869 and a moderate problem on GF655-2. `Citation' induced the most scion dwarfing but had the lowest yields and low yield efficiency. When yield, yield efficiency, fruit size, and tree mortality were considered together, the four peach seedling rootstock performed better than the other Prunus rootstocks and were ranked as follows: Siberian C, Halford, Bailey, and Lovell. Of these, the first three could be recommended with the most confidence to commercial growers who grow peaches on fine-textured soils in northern regions.

Download Full-text

EVALUATION OF OWN-ROOTED AND JUNE-BUDDED 'REDHAVEN' PEACH TREES AT TWO HEADING HEIGHTS

HortScience ◽

10.21273/hortsci.27.6.590b ◽

1992 ◽

Vol 27 (6) ◽

pp. 590b-590

Author(s):

Dwight Wolfe ◽

Gerald Brown

Keyword(s):

Fruit Set ◽

Total Yield ◽

Fruit Size ◽

Soil Surface ◽

Cross Sectional Area ◽

Fruit Yield ◽

Cold Injury ◽

Sectional Area ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Peach Trees

`Redhaven' peach [Purnus persica (L.) Batsch] trees which were either own-rooted (OR) or June-budded (JB) the previous year were headed back at planting to either (1) 70-85 cm above the soil surface (CH, conventional heading) or (2) the first bud 20-30 cm above the soil surface (LH, low heading). Propagation method had no effect on fruit yield in 1988 or trunk cross-sectional area; however, total yield in 1987, and the cululative yield for 1987 and 1988 were significantly greater for JB trees than for OR trees. LH reduced survival of OR trees, but not the JB ones. Cold injury was greater for the OR trees than for the JB ones. Neither propagation nor heading height influenced bloom density, fruit set in 1987, or fruit size in 1988. However, OR trees which were conventionally headed produced larger fruits in 1987 than did JB trees the same year.

Download Full-text

Effect of Four Training Systems on Growth and Productivity of `Cortland'/M.9 EMLA Apple Trees

HortScience ◽

10.21273/hortsci.33.3.451e ◽

1998 ◽

Vol 33 (3) ◽

pp. 451e-451

Author(s):

J.R. Schupp ◽

S.I. Koller

Keyword(s):

Fruit Size ◽

Vertical Axis ◽

Significant Loss ◽

Training Methods ◽

Cumulative Yield ◽

Or Efficiency ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Tree Survival ◽

Canopy Volume ◽

Planting Distance

`Cortland'/M.9 EMLA trees were planted in 1991 at 1.8 ×4.2-m spacing. The trees were trained to one of four systems: 1) Vertical Axis; 2) Y trellis; 3) Solen; or 4) Palmette trellis. Tree survival was 86% for Palmette trees and approached 100% for the other three systems. Annual yield and cumulative yield per tree of Vertical Axis and Y trellis was twice that of Solen or Palmette. Tree vigor was sub-optimal relative to planting distance in this study. Trunk cross-sectional area of Vertical Axis trees was larger than that of trees trained to Solen or Palmette, while trees trained to Y trellis were intermediate in trunk growth. Canopy volumes of Vertical Axis and Y trellis trees were similar, and greater than that of Solen or Palmette trees. Fruit size on Solen and Palmette trees was larger than that of Y trellis trees in 1995 and 1996, while fruit size on Vertical Axis trees was intermediate. Cumulative yield per cubic meter of canopy volume was the same for all four systems, suggesting that differences in productivity among systems were attributable to the effects of tree training practices on tree size, not to differences among systems in precocity or efficiency. The low heading cut needed to establish the lowest tier of branches on the Palmette system reduced tree vigor and in some cases, resulted in mortality. The horizontal training of the primary branches of the Solen severely reduced tree vigor. In this study, where tree vigor was sub-optimal due to rootstock selection, the additional restrictions in tree growth resulting from restrictive training methods resulted in a significant loss in productivity.

Download Full-text