News

Akbari, A., Bouzari, N., Esmail Amiri, M., Arzani, K. (2015). Evaluation of pomological traits of some new sweet cherry cultivars under Karaj condition. , 46(1), 17-25. doi: 10.22059/ijhs.2015.54121
Akram Akbari; Naser Bouzari; Mohammad Esmail Amiri; Kazem Arzani. "Evaluation of pomological traits of some new sweet cherry cultivars under Karaj condition". , 46, 1, 2015, 17-25. doi: 10.22059/ijhs.2015.54121
Akbari, A., Bouzari, N., Esmail Amiri, M., Arzani, K. (2015). 'Evaluation of pomological traits of some new sweet cherry cultivars under Karaj condition', , 46(1), pp. 17-25. doi: 10.22059/ijhs.2015.54121
Akbari, A., Bouzari, N., Esmail Amiri, M., Arzani, K. Evaluation of pomological traits of some new sweet cherry cultivars under Karaj condition. , 2015; 46(1): 17-25. doi: 10.22059/ijhs.2015.54121

Evaluation of pomological traits of some new sweet cherry cultivars under Karaj condition

علوم باغبانی ایران
Article 1, Volume 46, Issue 1, May 2015, Pages 17-25    PDF (349.77 K)
Document Type: Full Paper
DOI: 10.22059/ijhs.2015.54121
Authors
Akram Akbari1; Naser Bouzari* 2; Mohammad Esmail Amiri1; Kazem Arzani3
1Former Graduate Student and Associate Professor, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Zanjan University
2Assistant Professor, Horticultural Research Department, Seed and Plant Improvement Institute,
3. Professor, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Tarbiat modars University, Tehran
Abstract
abstract
Evaluation of pomological characteristics can be useful in selection of best cultivars for commercial purposes. During this project, seven cultivars of sweet cherry including five cultivars from Hungary (‘Stella’, ‘Sunburst’, ‘Germesdorf’, ‘Summit’ and ‘Subima’) and two control cultivars (‘Cillage Blamarka’ and ‘Siahmashad’) were studied by Completely Rondomized Blocks design with three replications during two years in Kamal Shahr Horticulture Research Station. Comparison of average fruit weight showed that ‘Sunburst’ had the largest fruit size (7.21 g), fruit length (23.23 mm), fruit width (23.7 mm) and fruit volume (7.09 cc) whereas the Blamarka’ had the lowest values. Average of Total Soluble Solids (TTS) ranged from 22.59% in ‘Siahmashad’ to 18.29% in ‘Stella’ cultivar. Results of this study showed that ‘Sunburst’ had the best pomological characteristics in Karaj climatic conditions. Furthermore, the Sunburst displayed self-compatibility characteristic and, therefore, may be the preferred cultivar relative to incompatible cultivars such as Siahmashhad.
 
Keywords
sweet cherry; Evaluation; new cultivar
References

 

  1. Abediani, M., Talebi, M., Golmohammdi, H.R. & Seyed-Tabatabaei, B.E. (2012). Genetic diversity and population structure of mahaleb cherry (Prunus mahaleb L.) and sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) using SRAP markers. Biochemical Systematics and Ecology, 400, 112-117.
  2. Agulheiro-Santos, A.C., Palma, V., Machado, G., Rato, A.E. & Cabrita, M.J. (2012). Quality evaluation of ‘Sunburst’ cherries harvested at different ripeness stages. Acta Horticulturae, 934, 1127-1131.
  3. Bandai, A., Thiesz, R., Ferencz, L. & Bandi, M.J. (2010). Some physical and biochemical composition of the Sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) fruit. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae Agriculture and Environment, 2, 5-16.
  4. Bernalt, M.J., Sabio, E., Hernández, M.T. & Gervasini, C. (2003). Influence of storage delay on quality of ‘Van’ sweet cherry. Postharvest Biological Technology, 28, 303-312.
  5. Blažková, J., Hlušicková, I. & Blažek, J. (2002). Fruit weight, firmness and soluble solids content during ripening of ‘Karešova’ sweet cherry. Horticulturae Science, 29(3), 92-98.
  6. Bolsu, A. & Akçsa, Y. (2011). Some fruit and morphological characteristerics of five sweet cherry cultivars grafted on Prunus mahaleb L. rootstock. Yüzüncü Yil Üniversitesi Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 21(3), 152-157.
  7. Christensen, J.V. (1995). Evaluation of fruit characteristics of 20 sweet cherry cultivars. Fruit Varieties Journal, 49(2), 113-117.
  8. Christensen, J.V. (1970). Cultivar trial with sweet cherry. Tidsskrift for Planteavl, 74, 301-312.
  9. Cline, J.A., Meland, M. Sekse, L. & Webster, A.D. (1995). Rain-induced fruit cracking of sweet cherries: I. Influence of cultivar and rootstock on fruit water absorption. Acta Agriculturae Scandinaica Series, 45, 213-223.
  10. Cliff, M.A., Dever, M.C., Hall, J.W. & Girard, B. (1996). Development and evaluation of multiple regression models for prediction of sweet cherry liking Food Research International, 28, 583-589.
  11. Crisosto, C.H., Crisosto, G.M. & Ritenour, M.A. (2002). Testing the reliability of skin color as an indicator of quality for early season ‘Brooks’ (Prunus avium L.) cherry. Postharvest Biology and Technology, 24, 147-154.
  12. Cordeiro Rodrigues, L., Remedios Morales, M., Fernandes, A.J.B. & Ortiz, J.M. (2008). Morphological characterization of sweet and sour cherry cultivars in a germplasm bank at Portugal. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution, 55, 593-601.
  13. Dever, M.C., Macdonald, R.A., Chiff, M.A. & Lane, W.D. (1996). Sensory evaluation of sweet cherry cultivars. HortScience, 31, 150-153.
  14. Dzhurinov, V. & Kolev, K. (2009). Fruit bearing habit of nine sweet cherry cultivars. Acta Horticulturae, 814, 245-250.
  15. Esti, M., Cinquanta, L., Sinesio, F., Moneta, E. & Dimatteo, M. (2002). Physicochemical and sensory fruit characteristics of two sweet cherry cultivars after cool storage. Food Chemichal, 76, 399-405.
  16. Jänes, H., Ardel, P., Kahu, K., Kelt, K. & Kikas, A. (2010). Some biological properties and fruit quality parameters of new sweet cherry cultivars and perspective selection. Agronomy Research, 8, 583-588.
  17. Kappel, F., Fisher-Fleming, B. & Hogue, E. (1996). Fruit characteristics and sensory attributes of an ideal sweet cherry. HortScience, 31(3), 443-446.
  18. Kask, K. & Jänes, H. (1998). Cherry breeding in Estonia. Acta Horticulturae, 468, 167-171.
  19. Looney, N.E., Webster, A.D. & Kuppermane, M. (1996). Harvest and Handling Sweet Cherries for the Fresh Market. In: Cherries, Crop Physiology, Production and Uses. Cambridge, CAB International: pp: 411-441.
  20. Moreno, J.Y. & Manzano, M.A. (2002). Variedades de cerezo parael vall del Jeret. Consejería de Agriculturay Medio Ambiente, Junta de, Extremadura, Badajoz, España.
  21. Naderiboldaji, M., Khadivi Khub, A., Tabatabaeefar, A., Ghasemi Varnamkhasti, M. & Zamani, Z. (2008). Some physical properties of sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) fruit. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural &Environmental Sciences, 3(4), 513-520.
  22. Pérez-Sánchez, R., Gómez-Sánchez, M.A. & Morales-Corts, R. (2008). Agromorphological characterization of traditional Spanish sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.), sour cherry (Prunus cerasus L.) and duke cherry (Prunus×gondounii Red.) cultivars. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 6(1), 42-55.
  23. Pérez-Sánchez, R., Gómez-Sánchez, M.A. & Morales-Corts, R. (2010). Description and quality evaluation of sweet cherries cultivars in Spain. Journal of Food Quality, 33, 490-506.
  24. Radičević, S., Cerović, R., Mintrović, O. & Glišić, I. (2008). Pomological characteristics and biochemical fruit composition of some Canadian sweet cherry cultivars. Acta Horticulturae, 795, 283-286.
  25. Rahemi, M. (1387). Physiology of postharvest. Publication of Shiraz University. pp: 437. (In Farsi).
  26. Revilla, I. & Vivar, A. (2004). Evaluación de la textura de diferentes variedades de cereza y guinda. Proc III Congreso Español Ingeniería Alimentos. Pamplona Spain Sept. 15-17. pp. 160-169. (In Spanish).
  27. Sekse, L. (1986). Fruit quality in sweet cherry varieties. Forskning Og Forsøki Landbruket, 37(4), 225-229.
  28. Usenik, V., Kastelec, D. & Štampar, F. (2005). Physicochemical changes of sweet cherry fruits related to application of gibberellic acid. Food Chemistry, 90, 663-671.
  29. Vangdal, E. (1985). Quality criteria for fruit for fresh consumption. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavi, 35, 41-47.
  30. Vursavuş, K., Kelebek, H. & Selli, S. (2006). A study on some chemical and physico-mechanic properties of three sweet cherry varieties (Prunus avium L.) in Turkey. Journal of Food Engineering, 74, 568-575.
  31. Yuliang, C., Shan, L., Yiping, C., Gui Fang, Z. &Runmin, F. (2005). Determination and analysis of main fruit inclusions of different varieties of Prunusavium.ActaBotanicaBoreali-Occidentalia Sinica, 25(2), 304-310.
Statistics
Article View: 2,247
PDF Download: 1,021


Journal Management System. Powered by Sinaweb