View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
0
titulo de la presentacion
23/11/2011
CONE YIELD EVALUATION OF CONE YIELD EVALUATION OF PINUSPINUS PINEAPINEA GRAFTED TRIALGRAFTED TRIAL
David BONO ALLAIN & Neus ALETA SOLERDavid BONO ALLAIN & Neus ALETA SOLERIRTA IRTA AgroforestryAgroforestry. Torre . Torre MarimonMarimon -- 08140 Caldes de Montbui (Barcelona)08140 Caldes de Montbui (Barcelona)
223/11/2011
BBACKGROUNDACKGROUND & O& OBJECTIVESBJECTIVES
§ In spite of the highly commercial value of its ediblekernels, the Stone pine still remains a genuine forestspecies.
§At present, virtually total commercial cone yield is stillharvested from natural forests.
§ In the last two decades, important efforts have beenmade for exploring the possibilities of Stone pine as anorchard crop, mainly focused in elucidating the relevanceof environment and genetic factors for seed-yieldquantity and quality.
323/11/2011
BBACKGROUNDACKGROUND & O& OBJECTIVESBJECTIVES
Nevertheless, information about seed production in clonalStone pine plantations is still scanty.
General objective
To go further in the study of agronomical potential of Pinuspinea grafted plantations.
Particular objective
To assess the effect of watering in floral induction, conesurvival and seed-yield quantity and quality.
4
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
SSITEITE DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION ANDAND PLANTPLANT MATERIALMATERIAL
§ LocationIRTA Torre Marimon (Caldes de Montbui, Barcelona)
2º 10' 29" E41º 36' 57" N163 m a.s.l.
§ Soil• Low fertility• Sandy, with a clayhorizon in the middleof the profile• Lightly alkaline pH
5
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
SSITEITE DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION ANDAND PLANTPLANT MATERIALMATERIAL
§ ClimateNemoral oromediterranean, in transition with
Subnemoral Mediterranean
Average annual temperature is 14.9 ºC, withabsolutes from –8.6 to 39.7 ºC (2000-2010)
Annual rainfall averaged 624.1 mm; Yearlyrainfall ranges from 472 to 954 mm (1991-2010)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
mm P
ETO
6
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
SSITEITE DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION ANDAND PLANTPLANT MATERIALMATERIAL
§ Plant materialProduced in 2003 by cleft grafting on seed-
grown rootstocks of P. halepensis(heteroplastic grafts)
Stone pine scions collected from a group of 10trees (Provenance Region: Cataluña litoral)
Stocked in nursery for 5 years, in smallcontainers (very limiting conditions)
Spring 2009
7
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
SSITEITE DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION ANDAND PLANTPLANT MATERIALMATERIAL
§ PlantationEstablishment: April 200896 trees, Spacing 6m x 6m Þ 0.35 haSoil preparation: ripper, manuringCultural treatments: mechanical
weeding, watering (drip irrigation)
Spring 2011
8
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
EEXPERIMENTALXPERIMENTAL DESIGNDESIGN
§ Background
Correlation of June rainfall with shoot lengthand flower bearing in the next year (MUTKE etal., 2003)
Annual Stone pine cone-yield variation is mainlya direct response to weather factors andresource depletion. The most notable limitingfactor seems to be water stress (MUTKE etal., 2005b)
9
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
EEXPERIMENTALXPERIMENTAL DESIGNDESIGN
Growing season has been divided in 3 periods
Irrigation treatments differ in the watered periods
Aproximate dates Processes involved
Period 1 April 1 – May 31
Spring shoot elongation2nd year cone growth3rd year cone growthSecondary growthFlowering and pollination
Period 2 June 1 – July 31
Terminal buds differentiationFertilisationOccasional summer shoot growthNeedle growthSecondary growth (final)3rd year cone growth (final)
Period 3 August 1 –September 31
Needle growth (final)Occasional summer shoot growthEmbryo development
Dates are approximate and must be corrected accordingto the year’s phenology.
Irrigation treatments were established, consideringdifferent application periods.
Outer rows are not irrigated and constitute a controltreatment.
The trial design was on randomized completeblocks, with 3 repetitions and 2 trees per observation.
Water supply (P-ETc of previous week) is calculatedaccording to rainfall and ETO data registered by TorreMarimon weather station.
10
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
EEXPERIMENTALXPERIMENTAL DESIGNDESIGN
Irrigationtreatment Period 1 Period 2 Period 3
T 1 100% (P-ETc) 100% (P-ETc) *
T 2 100% (P-ETc) * *
Control * * *
WWATERATER SUPPLYSUPPLY
11
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
J F M A M J J A S O N D
mm
2009 - Irrigation
IR
P
ETO
020406080
100120140160180200220
J F M A M J J A S O N D
mm
2010 - Irrigation
IR
P
ETO
2009: equal watersupply (64 litres / tree· week)
2010: equal watersupply (64 litres / tree ·week), except for theouter rows of the plot(non irrigated)
WWATERATER SUPPLYSUPPLY
12
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
020406080
100120140160180200
J F M A M J J A S O N D
mm
2011 - Treatment 1
IR_T1
P
ETO
020406080
100120140160180200
J F M A M J J A S O N D
mm
2011 - Treatment 2
IR_T2
P
ETO
2011 has been the first year that the water supply treatments have been properly applied.
Water supply: 115.6 m3/ha in Treatment 1 / 55.6m3/ha in Treatment 2.
These quantities belong to a young plantation with 5% of canopy cover.
§ Growth
Height, diameter, crown projection
§ Phenology
Shoot and flower development
§ Production
Cone cohorts have been monitored at individual tree level
13
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
MMEASUREMENTSEASUREMENTS
In monitored trees (observations): dimensions, weight and number of seeds of each individual cone, seed yield in kg, seed output
0,2 0,2 0,2
6,9 6,55,9
12,6
11,1
12,8
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
F N1 NT F N1 NT F N1 NT F N1 NT
2008 cohort 2009 cohort 2010 cohort 2011 cohort
Evolution of the successive reproductive cohortsFruits / tree
RRESULTSESULTS & & DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION
§ Onset on productionFirst male flowering in 2011, low intensityEarly onset on production, from barely 50 conelets/ha
in 2008 to more than 3500 in 2011First significant female flowering in 2009First significant cone yield in 2011 (4 years after planting)
14
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
49 46 43
1904 1798 1642
3503
3082
3558
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
F N1 NT F N1 NT F N1 NT F N1 NT
2008 cohort 2009 cohort 2010 cohort 2011 cohort
Evolution of the successive reproductive cohortsFruits / ha
RRESULTSESULTS & & DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION
§ Onset on production
15
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
Cohort IF F N0 N1 NT NC PC PP
2008 - 17 17 16 15 15 3,72 0,8
2009 660 647 637 623 569 504 290,1
2010 1214 1192 1068 1051
2011 1240 1233 1038
IF – initial female conelets number; F: number of pollinated conelets; N0: number of conessurviving the first summer; N1: number of one-year old cones; NT: total number of ripe
cones; NC: number of sound cone; PC: cone yield in kg; PP: seed yield in kg
Successive cone and seed yield parameters of thereproductive cohorts (total plot size 96 trees)
For the 2009 cohort:Cone survival throughout the tree years (NC/IF): 76%Cone yield (PC): 290.1 kg/plot Þ 839.2 kg/ha,Mean tree yield (PC/96): 3.0 kg/treeMean cone weight (PC/NC): 0.58 kg/cone
§ Effects of wateringCone yield
RRESULTSESULTS & & DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION
16
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
Treatment Mean cone yield(kg/tree)
Mean cone weight (kg/cone)
*** *T 1 4.00 a 0.616 aT 2 3.43 a 0.592 a
Control 1.90 b 0.536 bDuncan (a=0,05); *: significant at P<0,05%; **: significant P<0,01%; ***: significant P<0,001%
Analysis of variance for 2011 mean cone yield & mean cone weight
RRESULTSESULTS & & DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION§ Effects of wateringCone yield
17
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
Control T 1 T 2Mean tree yield (kg/tree) 1.9 4.0 3.4Sound cone yield (kg/ha) 509 1056 833Estimated seed yield (kg/ha)(20% of cone weight)
101.7 211.2 166.5
Estimated unshelled seed yield(kg/ha) (5% of cone weight)
25.4 52.8 41.6
In our conditions, cone yields of, at least, 500 kg/ha
Average cone yield in Spanish natural forests: 200-600 kg/ha
Average cone yield (1960-2000) in public forests of Valladolid(Northern Inland Plateau): 193 kg/ha
High yield Þ grafted trees, soil preparation, crown insolation,etc.
RRESULTSESULTS & & DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION
§ Effects of wateringFloral induction
18
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
Treatment Average individual flower number
***Irrigated 13.92 a
Control (non-irrigated) 9.96 bDuncan (a=0,05); *: significant at P<0,05%; **: significant at P<0,01%;
***: significant at P<0,001%
Analysis of variance for 2011 average individual flower number
P(mm)
ETO
(mm)Kc
ETC
(mm)P-ETC
(mm)Jan 36.3 27.5 0.35 9.6 26.7Feb 35.7 39.5 0.66 26.1 9.7Mar 76.3 67.3 0.84 56.5 19.8Apr 63.2 93.4 0.85 79.4 -16.1May 76.8 121.9 0.9 109.7 -32.9Jun 50.6 140.0 0.92 128.8 -78.5Jul 34.1 157.0 0.83 130.3 -96.2
Aug 39.3 148.5 0.62 92.1 -52.8Sep 58.7 102.7 0.49 50.3 8.4Oct 93.5 66.9 0.32 21.4 72.1Nov 25.7 36.6 0.56 20.5 5.2Dec 47.9 23.5 0.38 8.9 39.0
IR(m³/ha)
12.522.546.155.231.4
RRESULTSESULTS & & DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION
§ Hydric needs
19
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
mm P
ETO
ETC
Treatment 1136 m³/ha·year
Treatment 235 m³/ha·year
RRESULTSESULTS & & DDISCUSSIONISCUSSION
§ Hydric needs and water supply
In other nut crops (almond): 1500 m3/ha (support irrigation)
Irrigation concentrate on the first half of summer; in other fruit crops 5000-8000 m3/ha with higher needs at the end of summer.
20
Cone yield evaluation of Pinus pinea grafted trial
23/11/2011
Plant cover(%)
Treatment 1(m³/ha·yr)
Treatment 2(m³/ha·yr)
5 136 3510 272 7050 1360 350
21
titulo de la presentacion
23/11/2011
* david.bono@irta.es
Recommended